United and Liverpool EFL project - proposal rejected

I absolutely hate it that we're part of the "big six"
being part of the establishment doesn't sit right with me. Why else would I support city>
 
The FA should bring in it's own version of FFP. It would have just a couple of simple lawss. Plus a few new laws as follows.

1st All owned must be able to cover the debt of the club.
2nd No clubs in the Premier League have a debt greater than £250 million
3 rd There should be a levy of 4% of any transfer fee in the Premier League, going down by 1% for each of the league's below the Premier League
4th The FA should have 2 lists of manager's 1st list managers in employment a 2nd one of manager's who are unemployed.
5th The FA should bring in a rule that should you sack a manager you can only bring in a manager who is unemployed.

This should stop club poaching managers who are working at a another club.
 
BobbyBoy said:
I'm not sure I agree with you here, those that are desperate won't be the ones screwed long term, I'd argue those in league one and two will be benefit longterm. The ones getting screwed are lower half PL teams and championship clubs with genuine ambitions of promotion.

The proposal does have some good things in it but they very fact its coming from American investor's and decision making is been handed over to the few is a nonrunner.

Change is badly needed though but it should be coming from the FA. I do think the league would be better off with 18 teams and 14 votes is too many for agreement, 11 is fairer or 10 in an 18 team league. If its harder to get into the PL then maybe more clubs will stop gambling their existence on the prospect of the big money. This is the biggest issue, the PL makes so much money shysters form all over the globe want a piece. The really wealthy snakes just buy a PL club but the mere millionaires buy up league clubs and bet the mortgage on them. Something simple like a tax clearance certificate every 2 months or you can't play would solve tonnes of problems. You wouldn't be allowed play without insurance so just tack on a tax clearance certificate to that requirement. Players will need to be paid or they won't play and they're are already rules in place for non payment of transfers. Maybe something really draconian like relegation to the conference if you go into administration? Either way it shouldn't be possible for some dude to stroll in and wreck 120 of history in 18 months. Cu*ts will be cu*ts so its not their fault, governance is needed.

The big clubs have always been the big clubs, but for shambolic management they will remain that way. No matter who makes the rules the big teams from the big cities will be always be near the top. The job of the FA is look after her small guys and leave the others look after themselves.
Click to expand...
In a football league that was founded in England in 1888, the word "always" is relatively meaningless. I think you will find that the "big clubs" around at the league's foundation were not the same ones 20, 40, 60 etc years later, as football has always been cyclical in mature. The term "sugar daddy" was loitering around over 100 years ago,(and certainly well before the Emirate states came into existence) with it's meaning generally referring to rich benefactors injecting money into clubs they supported. Surprisingly, the more money injected, the more successful a team would be. As Werner von Braun once famously said "it's hardly rocket science!"
In the mid 60s a mid table Second Division club literally "won the pools", and were bankrolled by Littlewoods. For the next 20 years, they outspent everybody, and cleaned up on the silverware. Then clubs floated on the Stock Exchange and raised vast amounts of capital. This enabled them to flourish. The "big clubs" then managed to con/vince the rest of the division to form the Premier League with only 20 clubs AND keep the home gate receipts - great if you have a big ground, which they did.
At around the same time, UEFA decided to reformat their own competitions, and invited the top/big teams to complete in their biggest competition.
This meant that for around 15 years, the same 4 teams. with odd exceptions, received around £25M per year more than the other 16 teams. Now these big clubs will always be big clubs, as they can buy better players to retain their place in the trough, sorry, on the gravy train.
What could possibly go wrong?

(To be continued.)
 
King KdB of Belgium said:
The FA should bring in it's own version of FFP. It would have just a couple of simple lawss. Plus a few new laws as follows.

1st All owned must be able to cover the debt of the club.
2nd No clubs in the Premier League have a debt greater than £250 million
3 rd There should be a levy of 4% of any transfer fee in the Premier League, going down by 1% for each of the league's below the Premier League
4th The FA should have 2 lists of manager's 1st list managers in employment a 2nd one of manager's who are unemployed.
5th The FA should bring in a rule that should you sack a manager you can only bring in a manager who is unemployed.

This should stop club poaching managers who are working at a another club.
Click to expand...
6TH any club that doesnt agree to these rules should be sued for £50m
 
The more I read about this the more I believe it's going to happen, this is not about the love of the sport it's just about money. Hopefully we as fans of the game will see through this and fight tooth and nail to put these vultures back in their box.

The rags and scousers (Their boards) should be ashamed of themselves.
 
King KdB of Belgium said:
The FA should bring in it's own version of FFP. It would have just a couple of simple lawss. Plus a few new laws as follows.

1st All owned must be able to cover the debt of the club.
2nd No clubs in the Premier League have a debt greater than £250 million
3 rd There should be a levy of 4% of any transfer fee in the Premier League, going down by 1% for each of the league's below the Premier League
4th The FA should have 2 lists of manager's 1st list managers in employment a 2nd one of manager's who are unemployed.
5th The FA should bring in a rule that should you sack a manager you can only bring in a manager who is unemployed.

This should stop club poaching managers who are working at a another club.
Click to expand...
Alas, vested interests will always trump common sense and fair play - ("Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Lord Acton)
And "Greed is good" (Gordon Gekko)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.