Discussion in 'Pure Football' started by phillips10, May 18, 2019.
So it was a really good title race then?
Will all the top 6 get in though? If it's based on European history Arsenal, Man City and Spurs wouldn't get a look in.
If it's the top 20 teams based on income, Everton, mags and WHU would be in.
Exactly! There was more of a mixup and variety of teams every few season. Clubs could bring in unknown players and they'd develop as a team whereas now a team will just be picked apart sharpish if a player is good enough for top 6.
As chriswallace85 couldn't be arsed to answer my earlier question, I've just downloaded the league tables since 1970 and hoyed them into Excel. A simple pivot table just shows how little other teams have finished top 6 and even less in top 4 compared to years ago!
This is the top 6 team list over a 20 year period for 1970-1990 with 26 different teams and the times they were top 6. The period 1999-2019 had just 15 teams with more topsided figures from the big 6 highlighted in red
This is the top 4 showing even more how hard it is now to break into it! There were 18 teams 1970-90 but there were only 10 between 2000-19. Take out the big 6 it leaves only 6 places out of the 80 with the only 1 top 4 place in the last 14 seasons being Leicester as the other 5 were early 2000's!
What's even more shite is the last decade has been a canny close shop for other teams trying to get top 4/6 with very few succeeding! Only 5 more teams have managed to get top 6 place a paltry total of 6 times in the last 10 seasons, mainly at just Liverpool's expense. The top 4 is a forgone conclusion these days given the last 3 seasons and points gap to 7th of 8,9,11 points respectively!
How the fuck anyone can think the league is still cyclic when it's heading to a complete shut out is beyond me! If anything it will get worse as the big 6 just battle it out at the top between themselves like they have the last 3 seasons in a row. With the billions now in the game, the big boys simply have too much revenue every season, at least double than any other team and in some cases triple. This is gained from being at the top that keeps them growing while the rest just toddle along way behind feeding on the scraps. This also allows them to have squad players that would walk into any other team which other teams don't have the luxury of. Or they can fuck up buying players who can't perform whereas it could cripple some of the other teams.
I don't really want them to fuck off to a Super League but it was obvious years ago that it would happen and it has so I can understand why some do want it. I don't know how they could change it as salary caps and drafts etc like NFL would mean players just go to another country.
It won’t be a conventional league structure though. NFL style conferences, divisions etc leading up to. Superbowly Final.
Still be only one winner though, the rest will be losers. Supporters of these clubs don't do losing.
If a fairy godmother (or Thai billionaire) had rocked up at Sunderland and they were now probably the most likely contenders to take advantage of a serious dip for one of the “big 6” (hate that term) then I don’t think this thread would have ever started on here
The lad who listed the 24 clubs and said how cracking it would be , well it would basically be like a normal 2 game a slog same as every Championship season between clubs who think they are better than that , only there would be no pot of gold at the end of it
Let’s be honest the Championship is just a bun fight of clubs desperate to get their snouts in the PL trough and without that incentive it would be pointless pretty quickly
Spurs don’t really do winning do they?
and thats why ` our owners abolished the role of ceo-they want one person doing the football side and one the commercial side-with a chairman over all
Palace, Watford,Bournemouth,Brighton and a few more might think they should be on that list before a few on there
What’s the criteria there?
they are very successful...they are making progress every year and doing it sustainably..would they be more of a winner if they won the league up this year and lost the champs league semi final?
are portsmouth winners cos of the chekatrade and spurs not?
how can the top four be a foregone conclusion-this year spurs only scarped over the line?
they havent done the same as spurs in the league-they used to finish above them-now its below them-spurs have been promoted to the champions league regualrly-arsenal relegated from it..
It used to be the top 4, now its the top 6, this shows teams are catching up, I know man city and Liverpool were streets ahead but Watford,wolves and everton all had good season I think, not going to bother looking at the table but 2 of them 3 could chase 5 our 6th spot next season making git a top 8 of clubs if they stay there for the long run, they may never win the league but neither do spurs
At least you read it I did and should have 6 in there but after posting I mistakenly edited it to 4 before my 5 min time limit as I was rushing through some edits. What it means is that one of the big 6 will end up in the top 4 as has been shown over the last 15 years apart from just Leicester. Given the Champions League money is constantly creeping up, over £90 million for both Spurs and Liverpool this season, then it just gives them a constant advantage every season in finance and global exposure and marketing.
Man City caught up as they've hoyed cash at it but that's been stopped now. Spurs had good revenue but have caught up to a few others now due to getting into Europe in the last 10 seasons (as have all the other 5 apart from Liverpool in 2015). They have a global market and now have their stadium pulling in even more money and you can see how their revenue has shot up.
The rest won't catch up anytime soon and the fact that over the last 3 seasons they've been at least 8 points ahead of the rest and pulled away before half of the season has even completed just shows how topsided the league is now.
You can see below in the 2017-18 revenue table that the big 6 get double the revenue of the rest of the league. Once you take away the ridiculous wages, a side effect of the top clubs paying silly money, then then 14 clubs are not left with much in comparison. What the big clubs earn outside of the Premier League prize money is still more than than what any team gets in all their revenue!
This is the 2017/18 revenue and it just shows how the rest are quite competetively placed but the 6 just dwarf them now. In fact the 6 teams get £2.7 billion between them whereas the other 14 teams get £1.9 billion between them
Do you think Spurs are bothered about making £100's of millions but not winning silverware? The fans may think they are losers (tho they've now got a Champions League Final to look forward to) but football clubs have evolved into fully into a business now and Spurs aren't exactly struggling in that area and are quite successful and show no signs of failing at all.
I was looking for a recent post of mine and this one from over 5 years ago popped up in the search results/ Even back then it just showed the global pulling power of these clubs that can generate extra revenue for them. How on earth anyone can think think that a Watford, Southampton, Wolves or even Everton can now mount a serious challenge into being a 'big' team with global attraction is beyond me as a rich arab can't just bankroll it any more. Leicester's freak season came and went as even the extra £70 million they got for that one off Champions League didn't do much at all for them maintaining the challenge and they finished 12th.
Why football is dying a death due to the 'big' teams revenue!
great post thank ypu.
Interestingly the commercial director at arsenal is in the Financial Tomes today talking about how the premier league is much more important to them commercially than the champions league.
I think his point was that while the champions league is extra moeny for TV and gates etc..sponsors are happy to pay up just for premier league and dont put in big bonbues for champions league qualififcation.
Aye probably due to the global scale of the Premier League giving them far greater exposure than Champions League. Is this the article? I don't know if the link will work for anyone or if it was generated individually for me though.
Subscribe to read | Financial Times
I see they're even trying to shut shop in the Champions League now anyway!
Subscribe to read | Financial Times
Proposal to Restructure Champions League Leaves Out Most of Europe
This is a big step to the European League of course if it does head that way. It doesn't look like it will be just 1 league either but rather a few so that means all the big clubs will eventually get into the top league any way, they may just have to start in the 2nd division!
While the Champions League’s main competition will continue to be the 32-team event it is today, UEFA envisages substantial changes to its format to ensure a longer group stage in which teams would play in four groups of eight, with the top four teams qualifying for the knockout stages. Such a setup would create dozens more matchups of elite clubs to sell to broadcasters, with some perhaps on weekend dates that are traditionally reserved for domestic league play.
Champions from lower-profile leagues like those in the Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal and most of Eastern Europe, as well as elite-league clubs outside the top four or five spots in their domestic competitions, would be relegated to a 32-team second-tier competition and to a third division with 64 teams. Teams would be eligible to be promoted and relegated among the three divisions, but the financial resources available to those at the top could create a competitive advantage that might secure their places in the Champions League for the foreseeable future. Only four of the 32 places would be reserved for incoming clubs each season.
diffrenet article-the arsenal guy is-perhaps not surprisingly against the champions league changes
Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email firstname.lastname@example.org to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found here.
Subscribe to read | Financial Times
Topic Tracker Murad Ahmed, Sports Correspondent 11 HOURS AGO Print this page34 Arsenal has the chance to lift its first European trophy in 25 years next week at the Europa League final in Baku, Azerbaijan. It also offers an opportunity for vindication of the London football club’s business model under Stan Kroenke’s ownership. Victory over local rivals Chelsea would secure a place in next season’s Champions League — and a share of its €2bn prize fund. That compares with the €510m that is distributed among participants in the lesser Europa League. Yet Vinai Venkatesham, the club’s new managing director and a speaker at the Financial Times Business of Football summit on Tuesday, says that of more pressing importance is retaining its place among England’s so-called big six clubs — and the firepower that brings to spend big on players. “Arsenal is clearly a top European club so we want to be playing in the top European competition,” he said. “It’s important to our fans, it’s important to our current players. It’s also important to the types of players that we want and need to attract to the club and it’s also really important to maximise our revenues so that we can invest on the football side against our ambition.” “The Premier League is the thing that really draws the commercial partners in. Of course, all our commercial partners want us to be in the Champions League as well, but I think that the Premier League piece is just as, if not more, important than that.” Arsenal’s lack of silverware in recent years has resulted in antipathy among some fans, who accuse Mr Kroenke of chronic under-investment in players. Mr Venkatesham said it was a “misconception” that Mr Kroenke was an absentee owner. Instead, the American billionaire and his team are in daily contact with Arsenal executives. Every penny that we generate as a club is available for us to spend against our ambition Vinai Venkatesham, Arsenal managing director He does, however, admit that the need to raise revenues is crucial. Failure to qualify for the Champions League in the past two seasons has led to revenues falling from £419m in 2017 to £389.1m last year. The drop means Arsenal could soon be overtaken by bitter north London rivals Tottenham Hotspur, finalists in this season’s Champions League, in the rankings of the world’s highest-earning football clubs. Mr Venkatesham insists that Arsenal has a “robust” business model: one more reliant on being a contender for the English Premier League, where it shares in roughly £8bn in multiyear broadcast rights, than keeping a regular place in the continent’s most prestigious club tournament. Arsenal last won the Premier League in 2004. Next season, it will benefit from a new kit deal with German sportswear group Adidas and a renewed shirt and stadium sponsorship with gulf airline Emirates. Mr Venkatesham, who took the post as the club’s main business leader at the start of the season, declined to provide financial details, saying only that they were worth more than current contracts. Last season, Arsenal earned £107m from sponsorship deals. In the year to May 31 2018, Arsenal spent £205.9m on wages, up from £172m a year earlier. Mr Venkatesham says Arsenal will continue to spend heavily on players, vowing not to reduce the overall wage bill. Instead, the club is searching for better “efficiency” within its recruitment strategy. In 2012, it acquired analytics company StatDNA, which is tasked with identifying undervalued players in the transfer market. The club is also investing in its academy to develop young players, so as not to rely overly on expensive foreign imports. “Every penny that we generate as a club is available for us to spend against our ambition,” he said. “So, whether that is on wages or transfer fees — that’s where all the money goes. It doesn’t go anywhere else.” With the club’s focus on the Premier League for revenues, Mr Venkatesham railed against proposed changes to the Champions League and their potential threat to Arsenal’s finances. It emerged this month that Uefa, European football’s governing body, is proposing a promotion and relegation system to ensure the best sides stay within the competition each season. While Arsenal would be likely to benefit, Mr Venkatesham criticised the proposals, saying they threaten the primacy of the English Premier League as the most valuable club competition in world football. “We play in the world’s number one league and the world’s number one sport,” he said. “If there are changes to European football that could damage that position and weaken the Premier League; obviously that’s concerning to us.”
they weren;t invited last time there were talks
Anyone can break into the top table if they want to, just have to persistently throw money at the club.
Been that way for a hundred years, the figures are bigger, but the principal is the same.
Clubs to have done it recently are Chelsea and City. We were one of the first.
Separate names with a comma.