Depends how it’s structured. For example, two divisions ESL1 and ESL2. The teams currently qualifying for the Champs League from the big five leagues would be founder members of ESL1. The teams currently qualifying for the Europa League from the big 5 leagues plus the champions from several other European leagues would be founder members of ESL2. So qualification for membership of the founding leagues would be by sporting merit and there would be the opportunity for promotion from 2 to 1 based on merit. The broadcasting and commercial revenue generated by such a league would be immense and dwarf anything currently being made by clubs finishing second in their domestic league. Just an example plucked from thin air by a random poster on the internet, but I’m sure you get the concept.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Super League | FA + PL: New Charter & Fines | UEFA: Settlement
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
The Spanish clubs are not wholly fan-owned any more. All bar 4 (Barca, Real Madrid, Athletic Bilbao & Osasuna) are limited companies. We own 41% of Girona, with Pep's brother owning a similar amount. And two of those clubs were planning to be in it so they clearly didn't care about their fans.The attempt last week solidified the fact that the German clubs and Spanish top 2 can't join without their fans voting for it. So no Barcelona, Bayern or Dortmund. Perez might have enough sway at Madrid to get them to back him, but even that's unlikely.
PSG and City are happy with the status quo because we're winning vs the old guard in this format and it would take a lot of incentivising to get them to join another - especially now both have seen what's to be gained by not joining.
So who is going to form this super league? The Italian big 3, United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs?
And the 50+1 is a requirement of the DFL (German FA) which states that a team can't be in the Bundesliga without that. If Bayern or Dortmund decide they're going to join the ESL, they're not going to be in the Bundesliga and there's no 50+1 requirement imposed on them any more.
So fan ownership or 50+1 is a red herring.
Berts Neck
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 1,735
This is how I see it. It would be no different to buying a house.
1. Buy it outright with cash. Maybe you had an inheritance,won the lottery etc. --The City scenario.
2. You buy it with a mortgage at three times your salary. All is fine as long as you dont lose your job.--probably how most PL teams now operate--losing your job makes payments hard. The lender may agree to a payment holiday or you can re-mortgage if you have enough equity. Covid has affected clubs in a similar was as losing your job,income reduced.
3.You buy it with a mortgage at 20x your earnings.You then start having to get the Mrs. working, do two jobs and hope your asset is appreciating so if the poo hits the fan you are quids in. Barcelona/Madrid.In their case,they got so far behind with mortgage payments, unless they remortgage,or sell, they are in big trouble. This is why they were desperate for the ESL, as they need the cash to pay for such a steep mortgage.
4. You buy it with your mates.You live there but dont own it. German model. All fine but, but if you want an extension or otherwise you all have to agree. Not always easy or practical.
I know this is simplistic, but for the life of me I can not understand why option 1. is not viewed by the powers that be as a good way of owning a club. I do have to say that option 4. is probably the next best option.
1. Buy it outright with cash. Maybe you had an inheritance,won the lottery etc. --The City scenario.
2. You buy it with a mortgage at three times your salary. All is fine as long as you dont lose your job.--probably how most PL teams now operate--losing your job makes payments hard. The lender may agree to a payment holiday or you can re-mortgage if you have enough equity. Covid has affected clubs in a similar was as losing your job,income reduced.
3.You buy it with a mortgage at 20x your earnings.You then start having to get the Mrs. working, do two jobs and hope your asset is appreciating so if the poo hits the fan you are quids in. Barcelona/Madrid.In their case,they got so far behind with mortgage payments, unless they remortgage,or sell, they are in big trouble. This is why they were desperate for the ESL, as they need the cash to pay for such a steep mortgage.
4. You buy it with your mates.You live there but dont own it. German model. All fine but, but if you want an extension or otherwise you all have to agree. Not always easy or practical.
I know this is simplistic, but for the life of me I can not understand why option 1. is not viewed by the powers that be as a good way of owning a club. I do have to say that option 4. is probably the next best option.
The Spanish clubs are not wholly fan-owned any more. All bar 4 (Barca, Real Madrid, Athletic Bilbao & Osasuna) are limited companies. We own 41% of Girona, with Pep's brother owning a similar amount. And two of those clubs were planning to be in it so they clearly didn't care about their fans.
The 2 superclubs are. And Laporta and Perez have both said that while they're 100% in favour of the super league they can't proceed without the fans voting in favour.
And the 50+1 is a requirement of the DFL (German FA) which states that a team can't be in the Bundesliga without that. If Bayern or Dortmund decide they're going to join the ESL, they're not going to be in the Bundesliga and there's no 50+1 requirement imposed on them any more.
50+1 is a requirement for DFL but it's also the state that Bayern, Dortmund are in. They can't leave the Bundesliga without voting on it. There is no one at those clubs with the power to remove them without a vote.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
The 6 PL clubs would 100% have been expelled by the PL if they'd gone ahead with this. Highly likely any other club would have been expelled from their national league. So it's not a question of a vote to leave. They'd be out, full stop.The 2 superclubs are. And Laporta and Perez have both said that while they're 100% in favour of the super league they can't proceed without the fans voting in favour.
50+1 is a requirement for DFL but it's also the state that Bayern, Dortmund are in. They can't leave the Bundesliga without voting on it. There is no one at those clubs with the power to remove them without a vote.
You're one of the most intelligent posters on here but it seems your grudge with me over Sterling is clouding your normally very reliable judgement. Fan ownership is a red herring and Perez clearly sees it as such.
The 6 PL clubs would 100% have been expelled by the PL if they'd gone ahead with this. Highly likely any other club would have been expelled from their national league. So it's not a question of a vote to leave. They'd be out, full stop.
You're one of the most intelligent posters on here but it seems your grudge with me over Sterling is clouding your normally very reliable judgement. Fan ownership is a red herring and Perez clearly sees it as such.
This has nothing to do with Sterling, your posting on this topic makes no sense. Especially your last post "If Bayern and Dortmund decide they want to join" - this literally makes no sense. No one has the power to make that decision unilaterally without a member vote.
The chairman could announce such a move, and then sure as night follows day an extraordinary general meeting would be called and they'd have a referendum on leaving/joining by way of voting out the board.
Bayern, Dortmund, Barcelona and Madrid cannot join a super league without a vote of the members.
Joan Laporta and Floretino Perez have admitted this even as they say the clubs need to join a super league.
You can't have a super league without those 4 clubs. Definitely not a full time league-replacement.
Last edited:
FogBlueInSanFran
Well-Known Member
Americans view sport logically from a financial point of view. By and large, the largest cities have top tier franchises because they have a fan base that can generate economics. Smaller cities don't; ergo, they should be excluded from the top tier. There are exceptions (the Green Bay Packers of the NFL, e.g.), but very few. So we have minor league baseball and hockey, where smaller city teams are owned by individuals but have contracted affiliations with major league teams and serve as a "farm system" for younger players (like City's youth teams work, or how we send young players out on loan to smaller clubs for playing time). There are no loan deals in the States. Moreover there are no transfer fees -- although teams can "buy" players for cash that is usually rare, limited to small dollar amounts, and teams typically wait for contracts to expire and then good players go to the highest bidder on wage. Players switch clubs while still on contract far more frequently via trades.Fair point. My main concern is the Americans. Their view on sport is fundamentally different from our own which is ok until it threatens the very fabric of football in this country. Imo they view the fans as unlimited cash machines. Closed league were the peacocks of united, Liverpool, Madrid, Barca can strut around holding the rest of us in contempt all because they have a history of success.
Football goes in cycles and those clubs can’t accept the inevitable decline. Instead they chase after money almost akin to a gambler who is convinced he will win with his next roll. Only to realise that he has lost it all.
Debt regret... time to tap these cunts out of English football.
The economics of having to agree with a player via wage AND a transfer fee with the selling club is absolutely a reason we have a financial pyramid in football that the US doesn't have in any sport. Economically this has never made sense to me.
That's also why American teams move from cities whose population, fan base or sport popularity is stagnating to those that are growing. Leagues should be closed so that ownership have business stability, and if a league grows by adding expansion teams, it would be because the demand for a new franchise will bring in greater revenues for all, since by and large revenues are equally shared (it varies sport to sport, and this is less true in baseball).
As cultural and social institutions, however -- the American understanding of European football and football generally is woefully lacking. There is little tribal about American sports. While teams may have rivalries, nowhere in America do we cordon off a set of stands for away fans with police. Rival fans sit side by side wearing team colo(u)rs and, sure, every once in a while it kicks off (remember -- we serve alcohol in the stands in America), but very, very infrequently.
More important, the roots of so many English football sides were people's clubs, working class or otherwise, begun as amateur gatherings that eventually became professional, whereas nearly all American sports teams began with the intent of being professional sports entertainers from the outset.
Last edited:
FogBlueInSanFran
Well-Known Member
I apologize, and I know I sound absolutist -- but the only acceptable end concept for these owners is a closed league. The suggestion you plucked is fine, but it's just a gateway drug. Owners want the risk of not participating in league revenues to be 0%, which means a closed league. That's the ultimate aim -- the ONLY aim.Depends how it’s structured. For example, two divisions ESL1 and ESL2. The teams currently qualifying for the Champs League from the big five leagues would be founder members of ESL1. The teams currently qualifying for the Europa League from the big 5 leagues plus the champions from several other European leagues would be founder members of ESL2. So qualification for membership of the founding leagues would be by sporting merit and there would be the opportunity for promotion from 2 to 1 based on merit. The broadcasting and commercial revenue generated by such a league would be immense and dwarf anything currently being made by clubs finishing second in their domestic league. Just an example plucked from thin air by a random poster on the internet, but I’m sure you get the concept.
And when they invite Inter Miami to join them?The idea that a League containing all Europe’s top clubs would not be a fantastic spectacle and a worldwide ratings and commercial success is for the birds. Potentially tens of billions of additional revenue could be generated for the football pyramid. But yeah, keep watching the boring qualifiers with the same teams qualifying every year and teams giving tickets away to fill stadia and telling yourself that’s as good as it gets. You guys are dinosaurs standing in the way of progress.
What we have now is pretty shit but that is because the history clubs are/were allowed to call the shots. Take away their power, stop the revamp of the Champs League and start giving Leicester, Everton West Ham, belief that they can compete, add Atalanta and others in Europe instead of gobshite history wankers trying to stop them and we will have far better football
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
But Perez signed a contract and is saying clubs that signed that contract cannot pull out now. Why did he sign a supposedly unbreakable contract if he needed his members to endorse that? How is he going to pull out if it's put to a vote and his members vote against it?This has nothing to do with Sterling, your posting on this topic makes no sense. Especially your last post "If Bayern and Dortmund decide they want to join" - this literally makes no sense. No one has the power to make that decision unilaterally without a member vote.
Bayern, Dortmund, Barcelona and Madrid cannot join a super league without a vote of the members.
Joan Laporta and Floretino Perez have admitted this even as they say the clubs need to join a super league.
You can't have a super league without those 4 clubs. Definitely not a full time league-replacement.
At worst, they'll do something like form a new club or holding company that isn't member owned. Members won't be allowed to get in the way of earning money and it's naïve to think they will.