Shamelessly stolen off the communal 'Championship board' but I thought it might interest some on this board if you have 5 minutes to read about the state of the game and the effect the Premier league is having on it Writing in this week's Mail on Sunday, columnist Patrick Collins makes some interesting, and highly pertinent, observations... "When the Premier League revealed that its new television deal was worth £5.5billion over three years, the news was met with a popping of corks and a dropping of jaws. For this was the ultimate proof of English football's ability to accumulate riches beyond reason. So hands were pumped, backs were slapped and, amid the orgy of self-congratulation, a whiff of injustice was largely ignored. Which was a pity. For as the Premier League revels in its extraordinary wealth, the clubs outside that magic circle are increasingly reduced to the status of paupers. Statistics can be tailored to suit any story but the figures which have emerged over the past few days carry an ominous message for the weaker members of football's 'fraternity'. While Premier League clubs have secured £5.5bn from their television contracts, the Football League will be paid just £195m from its three-year deal with Sky. In addition, it will receive £240m per annum in 'solidarity' monies from the Premier League - a yearly increase of £40m or 20 per cent. But - and it is a crucial 'but' - of that £240m, £177m will be reserved for relegated Premier League clubs in the form of 'parachute' payments, up from £144m under the current deal. The outcome of the new agreement is genuinely dramatic and hideously unfair. If you reasonably consider that parachute payments to relegated clubs are, in effect, monies retained by the Premier League, then football's total broadcasting income will be split in the following proportions: Premier League - 93.27 per cent Football League - 6.73 per cent. Now, this column has long argued that the primary purpose of the Premier League is to create a competition in which the rich grow ever richer while the poor are cut adrift. In past seasons, the odd, indiscreet chairman has given the game away by demanding a more exclusive Premier League, by ending the threat of relegation. Although the idea was hastily dismissed, it would represent a logical progression for an institution which was conceived in greed and has grown still more rapacious down the years. But the effect on the weaker, poorer clubs would be calamitous. For the strength of the English game has always been found in its healthy diversity. The giants have always been with us; big-city clubs, well capable of looking after themselves. But the smaller clubs also belonged to the broad family. And they knew that if they organised shrewdly, invested intelligently and involved their players and fans, they could work their way to a higher level. The odds were always stacked against them, even in those distant days when the Football League was a broad co-operative, embracing every club. Television fees were laughably modest by modern standards but they were distributed in a roughly equitable and inclusive fashion. The paupers could indulge in princely dreams. But when the Premier League came sailing in on a sea of satellite television money, those dreams effectively died. Such were the stakes that the clubs were driven by an obsessive desire to thrust their noses in the trough and keep them there. I once asked a chairman why he was prepared to cut so many corners and pull so many strokes in order to win a place among the elite. He reacted with blank incomprehension. It was obvious, wasn't it? I was reminded of the notorious American criminal Willie Sutton, who was asked why he robbed banks. He replied: 'Cos that's where the money is.' Having reached the land of plenty, clubs immediately start to worry about what might happen if they fail to stay there. Their answer is to take out insurance in the form of those parachute payments. The object of these handouts is to ease the pain in the event of relegation. Always shameless, this time the ploy is particularly offensive. The payment is £23m in the first year, £18m in the second and £9m in years three and four; thus the total reward for failure amounts to £59m. Crucially, in the first year after relegation - a club's best chance to muscle their way out of the Championship - that will equate to an increase of almost 44 per cent. Under this formula, Reading, relegated after only a year in the Premier League, will receive £23m next season. While Millwall, say, who have not played in the top division in recent years, will be paid £1.8m from the Football League television deal plus their £2m 'solidarity' payment from the Premier League. So £23m plays £3.8m: the inequity is staggering. I do not suggest that vulgar self-interest is confined to the members of the Premier League. For instance, last week, at the Football League AGM in Portugal, Yeovil Town celebrated their promotion to the Championship by fiercely opposing a move to share extra money with clubs from Leagues One and Two! Nor do I argue for a return to the days when media revenue was shared relatively evenly among the 92 clubs. Desirable though that might be, we have come too far to turn back. But I do believe that avarice is now completely out of hand, and that the disproportionate distribution of income is seriously damaging the health of the game."
Like Select Committees recommending better pay and conditions for MPs and turkeys not voting for Xmas it's just the way of things.....
I've been going on about it for ages KOPR but don't expect too much of a reaction on here. Threads like these rarely generate much interest, they require a bit of thought and more than a two word reply. I can see the premier league slowly moving towards a closed two tier system that will include maybe forty teams. Smaller local clubs may merge to create something larger and more sustainable but inevitably many will eventually go bust and cease to exist. It seems to me that the PL wants to make a select few clubs as rich as possible so that they will all have the money to afford the best players to grace their franchise. Teams who are promoted get a huge chunk of cash and are quite free to spend that dough on players and wages because they know that there is a safety net in place should they get relegated. Parachute payments for some, combined with FFP for all, will be the death of many teams as they struggle to compete and we will be left with a much smaller number of professional teams in the country.
The reason why there is such a lack of interest in this topic SD is because at the end of the day what's the point of constantly banging on about it? We can't change it and its the same old story! The rich get richer and pull the ladder up behind themselves. Why talk about the things that we can not control?
The thing that irks me is that there are people who would like to see the end of relegation from the premier league. (That was more than a two word response SD.)
I find it an interesting subject. We are all watching as the PL monster grows, chewing some clubs up and spitting them out. Well, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Come on Ipswich!!!!!!! JWM, There's nothing we can do about which players are bought or sold, what tactics are played etc either but we still discuss it.
that really would be the death knell to football in this country. unfortunately the premier league is fuelled by greed and it will continue to be that way until it implodes and eats itself. i personally don't think that implosion is too far away and suspect that this latest tv deal could well prove to be the final monster package
The way things are going their is going to be no competition outside the top 23 teams (20pl and 3 newly relegated). The newly relegated teams are easily competing above the level that any other club can obtain with ffp coming into force. Not being rude to Norwich or Swansea and the like but it seems mad that both are able to attract players of the price tag and quality of RVW and Bony after just a few years in the premier league shows the way things are going. It really does look startling and is beginning to feel like your relying on others to implode rather than being able to build a promotion bid. The hope is that you get to the play offs and win in the final with a bit of luck. Things may become clearer over the next couple of seasons but it definitely seems like its potentially very scary
With FFP and the financial restraints it brings surely we should be thinking about electronic advertising boards. I'm not sure how these sort of things are factored into the budget but if Marcus can invest in advertising boards without it affecting the team/transfer budget then it is something we should be looking at. At the moment we have static boards advertising one company in one space but with electronic you will be able to bring more revenue in from more companies within the same space. Just a thought.
TB, You have to consider all of the teams that get relegated each year. Before long there will be a large number of clubs who are financially much better off than the rest in the championship, in fact, there already is. All the others can hope for is that some bounce straight back up so that their remaining parachute payments can be split between the rest of us.
SD, My worry is that it will just be 23 teams with 6 or 7 constantly trading places between the top of the championship and the bottom of the premier league. With the clout of parachute payments and the restrictions in place for the rest of the teams it may become almost impossible to get a look in. It certainly means you can outspend the rest of the league with ease.
And you have a point but there will always be a team who with good organization and a sound transfer policy can find themselves in the top six. There is certainly a divide appearing in the championship between those that have PP's and those that don't. It's not such a level playing field anymore so the sooner we can get to the PL the better or we may be in danger of falling too far behind. It's worse for the clubs promoted from league one who have even less to spend.
Whilst I hate the PL cash cow and parachute payments, I think FFP is the right step forward however it should be throughout all the leagues including the PL otherwise I think it will do more damage than it does good. Yes it is a concern that clubs with parachute payments will outspend the rest of the league but at the same time it's not the be all and end all. Look at the 3 teams who went up last year, only Hull recieved parachute payments. Then you have Wolves who went down and Blackburn who were right in the relegation fight!!
I pretty much agree with the thrust of the OP.With a bit of luck and effort a promoted club can stay up for a couple of seasons without big spending it's inevitable that you either succumb or splash some cash.Even then survival isn't guaranteed- witness QPR.
