European premier league bombshell.....

[TheBigIguana]

they are linked though - ESL is five clubs, BP was six but you wonder whether the sixth knew that beforehand

They'll get the 6th into the Super League. The objection is that English teams would be able to easily control the decision making with 6 members but when it comes down to Spurs/City or someone like Schalke or Sevilla they'll all see the money and make the concession.

 

[catcherintherye]

We were told we'd have concrete plans by the end of the month. With each day that passes it becmes clearer this is a big bluff, and the levels of funding involved are nowhere near secure.

It's going to be hilarious seeing clubs barely covering the expense costs of broadcasting the games via the domestic PPV take up.

 

[catcherintherye]

So what is clear from that (assuming it's true) is that the 6, not just the 2, are in it together

I really don't think you can get that from that article at all. Maybe 6 tmeams were aware of discussions, but only 2 seem to have briefed they'd go for it. Meanwhile the concrete plans we were promised aren't here and it is starting to have all the validity of a pyramid scheme.

As for the Barca chairan, it's interesting thathis comments have been widely rubbished. You do wonder if he is resigning because the club don't support going into said imaginarily funded league? It all seems rather coincidental.

 

[degsy]

I really don't think you can get that from that article at all. Maybe 6 tmeams were aware of discussions, but only 2 seem to have briefed they'd go for it. Meanwhile the concrete plans we were promised aren't here and it is starting to have all the validity of a pyramid scheme.

As for the Barca chairan, it's interesting thathis comments have been widely rubbished. You do wonder if he is resigning because the club don't support going into said imaginarily funded league? It all seems rather coincidental.

Back to the old plan of the G12, G14 or whatever it was

 

[number4.]

I really don't think you can get that from that article at all. Maybe 6 tmeams were aware of discussions, but only 2 seem to have briefed they'd go for it. Meanwhile the concrete plans we were promised aren't here and it is starting to have all the validity of a pyramid scheme.

As for the Barca chairan, it's interesting thathis comments have been widely rubbished. You do wonder if he is resigning because the club don't support going into said imaginarily funded league? It all seems rather coincidental.

My take from a PR POV, is if any of the big 6 had serious grievance with the Big Idea proposal, they would have clambered to raise their neck above the parapet & take the plaudits, especially when it comes to Man City, who are desperate for any separation from greed and their actual role within the club.

Firmly believe any of these 6 would be happy to pull the ladder up behind them, the only difference is two were shameless enough to do it publicly.

 

[mahermi1]

Interesting note from Tariq Panja this evening....

While announcing his resignation, Barcelona’s outgoing president drops news that the club has agreed to join a European Super League (with other great clubs). Says a final decision will be made following a vote of the club’s members. What a thing to mention on your way out!

Well that worked out well for him didn't it.

 

[mahermi1]

more is coming out - this is pretty shocking this:

Premier League kept Project Big Picture plans secret from clubs outside big six

Premier League executives did not tell clubs outside the big six the full extent of their knowledge over plans to radically change English football

www.theguardian.com

If this happens, and it looks like its going to, the remaining 14 (or 15) have to kick the traitor clubs out - ideally straight away, but if not then when this starts.

The PL and FA also need to be purged, ideally in a Stalinist fashion.

No wonder Everton wanted an apology, the other 13 clubs should have demanded one as well. Utter backstabbers, also Masters and the other idiot, should be made to resign at once, the 14 other clubs should have a vote of no confidence in them, to at least show their feelings.

 

[catcherintherye]

My take from a PR POV, is if any of the big 6 had serious grievance with the Big Idea proposal, they would have clambered to raise their neck above the parapet & take the plaudits, especially when it comes to Man City, who are desperate for any separation from greed and their actual role within the club.

Firmly believe any of these 6 would be happy to pull the ladder up behind them, the only difference is two were shameless enough to do it publicly.

I have to say I find that a very unusual take.

At this point, if you support something you brief and have your name attached. They haven't. Only 2 have. 1 of them (Manchester United) have actually distanced themselves to it.

Maybe sides will leave, but whats clear is there is anything but a united bloc around this idea. Also weren't we meant to hve concrete proposals on funding etc by now? I have seen even FIFA have washed their hands of it.

Every day that goes by, this looks like utter rubbish and a complete bluff to try and make up for the fact they got routed with their coup attempt.

 

[number4.]

I have to say I find that a very unusual take.

At this point, if you support something you brief and have your name attached. They haven't. Only 2 have. 1 of them (Manchester United) have actually distanced themselves to it.

Maybe sides will leave, but whats clear is there is anything but a united bloc around this idea. Also weren't we meant to hve concrete proposals on funding etc by now? I have seen even FIFA have washed their hands of it.

Every day that goes by, this looks like utter rubbish and a complete bluff to try and make up for the fact they got routed with their coup attempt.

Fully appreciate we have a different take on this, as I have said before that's probably a good thing. My key points.

- Was is a disaster? From a PR pov it was catastrophic, but neither of them will care, they are two US based investment vehicles who would sell respective grounds for property development if the could "Turn a buck". Reality its neither give a toss, about the integrity of the league, they pryamid or the game.

- Is it the end if "Big Idea" - no, while humiliated by voting against their own proposal, the outcome of a strategic review & the change that it will provoke is certainly partial response that the two (and probably six) wanted - this review is agreed and going ahead. It will start with, taking some of the good ideas from Project Big idea (there were a few)

- Is there a block, not formally - but given the lack of any public objection from any of the others in the self ordained six, I suspect behind closed doors there have been nods and winks, there is undoubted appetite for change & increased power & more importantly either through veto of owner or tighter FFP, effectively making another MCFC impossible.



-

 

[catcherintherye]

Fully appreciate we have a different take on this, as I have said before that's probably a good thing. My key points.

- Was is a disaster? From a PR pov it was catastrophic, but neither of them will care, they are two US based investment vehicles who would sell respective grounds for property development if the could "Turn a buck". Reality its neither give a toss, about the integrity of the league, they pryamid or the game.

- Is it the end if "Big Idea" - no, while humiliated by voting against their own proposal, the outcome of a strategic review & the change that it will provoke is certainly partial response that the two (and probably six) wanted - this review is agreed and going ahead. It will start with, taking some of the good ideas from Project Big idea (there were a few)

- Is there a block, not formally - but given the lack of any public objection from any of the others in the self ordained six, I suspect behind closed doors there have been nods and winks, there is undoubted appetite for change & increased power & more importantly either through veto of owner or tighter FFP, effectively making another MCFC impossible.

I'm afraid a lo of this is just groundless conjecture.
1) Was it a disaster. Yes. What they wanted to get through failed and was voted down by every team. They have then unified opposition to their plan that may not have been there before. They are aso viewed by PL chairmen as selfish individualists not helpful paternalists as a result. They are massively weakened.

2) To a degree almost. The review was explicitly called against their interests. As was stated "in the interests of the 20" I.E not in their interests. They have to win at least 8 teams over and have hacked them all off. So the review is going ahead, but on explicitly different terms to what were outlined in big picture. This isn't opinion, it's just objectively putting the facts.

3) As I have stated above, the evidence clearly notes there are clear disagreements within the block. They are not going to come out and attack something they haven't put their name too. Literally only 2 teams have initially had it briefed as them, and 1 has no backtracked. If this was serious, 6 teams brief the press they are on board. It's easy to do and hasn't been done.

The tighter owner stuff is not going to be passed. It has been brought to the vote and rejected. Even within the top 6, Chelsea and City will not want tighter FFP. Even if they did, the rules aren't compatible with European Law (as we have seen this summer).

You really are mistaking a position of strength for a position of weakness. I don't think I've ever seen a situation, where an idea is absolutely routed at all levels, and then finally is voted down 100% proclaimed a success. If they wanted a review, they'd have asked for a review and probably got one and conducted it from a position of strength.

I must also add, you really can't them not coming out to support notions as evidence they do. The opposite is true. If they want to support it, they will indicate as much. I suspect 4 of the 6 are hedging their bits and seeing what the best option is for them. People don't like backing losers, and if it flls flat on it's, or someone ends up being booted out, why not allow it to be Liverpool alone taking the risks?

As a final aside, I keep reiterating this, but we were told we'd have details. We haven't got any. If you're serious on proposals you keep to promised time scales.

 

[Duncan’s Pigeon Loft]

I wonder if Liverpool’s number4. Will have recovered from his ACL by the time this Super League kicks off

 

[Minimeister]

So they don't want to jib their own domestic leagues off, but want to handpick who plays in their super league. It's not just me, surely. Could only be believed by the crackpots over on RAWK.

 

[Yarrgh]

So they don't want to jib their own domestic leagues off, but want to handpick who plays in their super league. It's not just me, surely. Could only be believed by the crackpots over on RAWK.

It's like al alternative league. Only grade A idiots would be interested in that!

 

[OneTrueLegend]

Uefa are apparently planning to propose that 2 places in the champions league will be reserved for 2 teams that are the highest European coefficients, that have not qualified for the champions league via their league position or by winning the competition, from 2024.

So in theory, there could be 6 Premier league teams in the Champions League in the future, if for example, Spurs win the league, Leicester 2nd, Chelsea 3rd, Man City 4th, Man Utd 5th and Liverpool 6th.

Man Utd and Liverpool could still be in the champions league with the top 4 because of their previous record in the competition.

Its not mentioned what would happen to the europa league places though, so it could get complicated

Premier League 'Big Six' could all qualify for Champions League

UEFA's latest blueprint for their blue riband competition could see Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Man City and Man United potentially play in the competition during the same season.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[number4.]

Uefa are apparently planning to propose that 2 places in the champions league will be reserved for 2 teams that are the highest European coefficients, that have not qualified for the champions league via their league position or by winning the competition, from 2024.

So in theory, there could be 6 Premier league teams in the Champions League in the future, if for example, Spurs win the league, Leicester 2nd, Chelsea 3rd, Man City 4th, Man Utd 5th and Liverpool 6th.

Man Utd and Liverpool could still be in the champions league with the top 4 because of their previous record in the competition.

Its not mentioned what would happen to the europa league places though, so it could get complicated

Premier League 'Big Six' could all qualify for Champions League

UEFA's latest blueprint for their blue riband competition could see Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Man City and Man United potentially play in the competition during the same season.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Really interesting - for some perspective, the so-called big 6 are all in the top 14 European clubs based on Co-efficient. Leicester are next best below the likes of Celtic, Braga & Genk in 51st, so safe to say the "big 6" are locked in.

Where it becomes really interesting, in terms of coefficient rewards, UEFA measure success in the CL and the Europa league equally, which might see the Europa league being treated way more seriously if for example Man United are struggling for league results but are trying to keep their #2 ranking (they are the second highest PL team at present)