The big six being United, City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/sep/27/premier-league-clubs-block-big-six-tv-cash
Is it just me, or does this stink of greed?
The Premier League has generally been a competitive league. The changes in European seedings and TV money have distanced the top clubs further from the rest, and that is a problem in my view.
This proposal would only serve to exacerbate this issue, particularly as the Premier League grows even bigger in foreign markets.
It is already a joke that most clubs start a season knowing that the best they can hope for is 7th place. The Leicester miracle doesn't really change that.
Surely proposals like this are for one reason only - to extend that gap and to make the league less competitive?
Yes, a lot of the TV revenue is due to people wanting to watch these 'big six' in action.
But if you destroy the league, presumably the desire to watch those clubs in action will then fall?
Are they not bringing in enough money as it is?
This stinks of greed, to me.
The big six - hang your heads in shame
posted on 29/9/17
"I do however like to go to games, as the pricing to watch live footie seems to be a lot more reasonable these days."
Not sure I agree with this.
Try taking your son to a game, picking up a programme, something to eat etc.
Tough for many families out there.
posted on 29/9/17
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
"I do however like to go to games, as the pricing to watch live footie seems to be a lot more reasonable these days."
Not sure I agree with this.
Try taking your son to a game, picking up a programme, something to eat etc.
Tough for many families out there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And it doesn't need to be given the amount of money teams are making. Greed.
posted on 29/9/17
Comment Deleted by Article Creator
posted on 29/9/17
I think the distribution of money evenly is a good thing for the league. However, it only happens because the bigger clubs allow it to happen. I don't think it's greedy for them to ask for more money as they contribute by far the biggest viewers to the league. However just because I don't think it's greedy to do this doesn't mean I don't think it's bad for the league.
posted on 29/9/17
Mumbai Mkhitaryan (U3867)
One could argue that those viewers would still watch if one team were taken out of the league.
The league is the product, not the team.
posted on 29/9/17
There is also the argument that the bigger clubs only are they bigger clubs due to the exposure of tv in the first place. They're already benefitting more than the other clubs as they attract more fans.
posted on 29/9/17
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 25 minutes ago
There is also the argument that the bigger clubs only are they bigger clubs due to the exposure of tv in the first place. They're already benefitting more than the other clubs as they attract more fans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Would be interesting to see the equal share of the Tv money distributed to the Spanish clubs instead of the big two getting the lions share.
posted on 29/9/17
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 27 minutes ago
There is also the argument that the bigger clubs only are they bigger clubs due to the exposure of tv in the first place. They're already benefitting more than the other clubs as they attract more fans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Precisely.
posted on 30/9/17
comment by Baz tardo (U19119)
posted 1 day, 1 hour ago
There's a balance between keeping the Premier League as competitive as possible, making it as entertaining as possible to a global audience (there are others factors that help in addition to competitiveness), and maximising the revenue of those clubs likely to be taking on the best in Europe.
-/
Clubs have money coming out if their ears in the prem. Prices are greedy. Look at ticket prices elsewhere in europe, Germany for example. Prem clubs and sky know they can rip off punters, and that they'll pay, so they do, its greed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't disagree with this and think given the huge tv money now relative to gate receipts and the likely big increase again I believe ticket prices should drop dramatically. I'd go so far as to say they could almost charge an admin fee only. It would help bring the game back to toward the working class, the younger generation and help improve the atmosphere greatly, which is something they keep saying is needed. This in turn improves the product which drives more advertising and tv revenue so there is a financial benefit too.
posted on 30/9/17
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 day, 1 hour ago
Charlton the Happiness Devil (U21517)
There's no balance.
The clubs don't care about competition - they want as much money and protection as they can get.
"A highly competitive top 6 domestically that are also able to dominate on and off the field in Europe seems to be a good balance."
Try telling that to the other clubs in the league.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You misunderstood what I was saying. I meant a balance between a competitive league and giving the clubs that qualify for Europe a better chance of getting the very best players in the world. This would more with the aim of helping EPL clubs dominate in Europe whilst also bringing more of those world class players to the EPL. Both these things in turn make the whole league more prestigious and drives overall revenue higher. Don't forget the proposal is only to distribute 35% of the tv money by position and the rest spread evenly. Surely this encourages teams to fight more for position too. Anyway as your point suggests I can't see half the teams going for this and 14 will be needed