EFL-No extended play offs

Status
Not open for further replies.


Swindon On Tour said:
I meant that it will harm you as you would expect to have a bigger budget from income. Your current owners must be very worried with no income coming in and a massive financial void to fit.
However all lower league clubs are in a crisis with no income coming in.
Bad times and hope we come out of this.
Click to expand...
Most football fans would rejoice in us going under.
 
SpiritofBurnden said:
It was L2 clubs who said they shouldn't be relegated.

To be fair they can't have it both ways.

If L2 want their clubs promoted to L1, they have to accept relegation from L2.
Click to expand...

.........absolutely the right answer and the supporting notes that the National League must be a going concern to take on the relegated clubs.
Barrow should be rewarded.
 
sksk3021 said:
There may be a market there may not, if we are to believe the financial issues facing clubs it's going to be reduced.

You could make the same argument to finish the season, tell the players they have to take pay cuts or the clubs can't pay them.

How much of revenue are we really talking about clubs losing this season anyway?
Click to expand...

Too many players are out of contract by the end of June to do that this season.

Players will just sit it out in the hope of getting a better deal.

Once next season is about to start, they'll have to take it or leave it.

According to Accrington's chairman, the cost of finishing this season is £640,000, including £140,000 for testing.
 
0321safc said:
How’s it the most fair way when the composition of the top 6 was changing on a bi-weekly basis ?
Click to expand...

I said finishing the season is the most fair way and that the extended play offs was a load of shite, which it is. All of a sudden you had teams down to Gillingham putting their names in the hat.
 
pfceggchaser said:
I’ve looked at this in quite a lot of depth. It’s unweighted because:
1) The principle is to reward what has been played only as closely as possible. Unweighted does that better.

2) Weighted goes into the realms of projection and distortion. Review the PL case of AFC Bournemouth or West Ham where they’ve played the same number of home and aways as each other and have the same points.

3) Oxford, the club with the biggest material benefit, were the club who were proposing WPPG and were leaking it to the press left, right and centre.

4) Unweighted will get more support: only 5 teams are materially affected in the whole EFL - the 5 you mention. Nobody else cares.

- Oxford/Posh wanted weighted
- Wycombe/Pompey wanted unweighted

Fleetwood, the 5th team will choose the one that gives them the easiest playoff semi opponent. They’ll choose Wycombe over Posh.

WPPG has gone now. The question is do you vote to play on or not? I hope we vote to play on personally, as the precedent it sets in L1 is scary.
Click to expand...

A good point is that if you vote to curtail you must give up your play off place. Might get those three extra votes needed.
 
Ilios said:
Unweighted, Points per game is an absolute joke. There's about 8 teams separated by the width of a rat's knacker, all with different remaining fixtures.

On PPG, Wycombe get into the playoffs because they have a game in hand on Peterborough - their game in hand is Coventry away :) . At one point, Wycombe were well clear at the top, they've fallen down the league faster than us.
Click to expand...
Wycombe also played Bolton 1st game of the season when they were donating points
 
SpiritofBurnden said:
Too many players are out of contract by the end of June to do that this season.

Players will just sit it out in the hope of getting a better deal.

Once next season is about to start, they'll have to take it or leave it.

According to Accrington's chairman, the cost of finishing this season is £640,000, including £140,000 for testing.
Click to expand...
And according to the Peterborough chairman the cost of not finishing the season is a lot more.
 
Someone on twitter suggesting that if you vote not to continue then you shouldn't be allowed in the playoffs. Not playing means not playing.
 
roppa said:
Needed 3 more points to be in the playoffs on the unweighted system I think.

bolton home and away spring to mind
Click to expand...

Or, probably, if we had just played Southend away rather than Coventry away already. That’s why it’s a completely unfair way to sort it out.
 
It is totally ridiculous. I mainly feel for Tranmere and Peterborough but it is harsh on us too even though we don't deserve it.
Coventry have been the best team this season but the fact that they have gone up without winning it is just typical Coventry
 
SpiritofBurnden said:
Too many players are out of contract by the end of June to do that this season.

Players will just sit it out in the hope of getting a better deal.

Once next season is about to start, they'll have to take it or leave it.

According to Accrington's chairman, the cost of finishing this season is £640,000, including £140,000 for testing.
Click to expand...
These are pretty big leaps to make, assuming everyone is going to be able to sell players over the summer to keep going and that they are going to be able to either renegotiate contracts or release players.

It might cost them £500k but they will be costs they expected. The real question is how much income will they lose?
Not fulfilling the fixtures I would guess means less TV income? Fulfilling them behind closed doors means losing matchday income, maybe offset a bit by streaming income and depends on what happens with season tickets.
 
the dude said:
Someone on twitter suggesting that if you vote not to continue then you shouldn't be allowed in the playoffs. Not playing means not playing.
Click to expand...

Which I think makes complete sense, but I think there would still be 12 teams voting for it.

Coventry, Rotherham, Wimbledon, Mk Dons, Rochdale, Accrington, Lincoln, Bristol Rovers,
Blackpool? Gillingham? Burton? Bolton and Southend would probably do it since they’re most likely going down anyway, and they might save money this way?
 
sksk3021 said:
These are pretty big leaps to make, assuming everyone is going to be able to sell players over the summer to keep going and that they are going to be able to either renegotiate contracts or release players.

It might cost them £500k but they will be costs they expected. The real question is how much income will they lose?
Not fulfilling the fixtures I would guess means less TV income? Fulfilling them behind closed doors means losing matchday income, maybe offset a bit by streaming income and depends on what happens with season tickets.
Click to expand...

If players want to continue to be professional footballers they won't have any choice but to renegotiate contracts.

Either that or find something else to do that pays more than football.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top