English Premier League Have Another Stupid Idea

Mr Alan

who said the the PL has a higher profile than the NFL?

Villain

leninbenjamin wrote: »

Jesus F%cking H Christ.

Calm down the lot of ye.

it's one game. it'll be one game out of 39.

All 10 extra games would be played abroad under this idea, jesus how about reading the proposal before posting?

MrJoeSoap

leninbenjamin wrote: »

Jesus F%cking H Christ.

Calm down the lot of ye.

Us calm down? Us??

leninbenjamin wrote: »

it's one game. it'll be one game out of 39. all the clubs agreed. clearly they are willing to accept the chance of the fixture not necessarily being a favourable one in order to reap the financial benefits, so why can't the fans?

No, the clubs agreed to "explore the proposals", huge difference. Should the fans have to agree with the clubs on this one?

leninbenjamin wrote: »

anyone who thinks the premiership is completely fair in it's fixture list as it is are deluding themselves. some teams always get good luck and bad luck in the creation of the fixtures, coupled with TV f*cks up any chances of the season being completely fair. Like United not having to play Chelsea until the end of the season last year perhaps? that suited United's prospects a lot better than Chelsea's. if anything the prospect of an extra might add a bit more spice to the run ins.

The current Premiership fixture system is as fair as it could ever be. The proposed system is not, it is much less fair. If you play each team home and away once each season then you cannot complain about the fixtures, unless somehow you have to play a high number of games in a short period of time. United had no benefit from playing Chelsea at the end of last season, fixtures-wise.

leninbenjamin wrote: »

this is the type of thing that could cement the premiership as the biggest league in the world. that would be good for you the fans of said premiership clubs you know.

Because of more money? More money doesn't automatically mean better football or a better league.

MrJoeSoap

Mr Alan wrote: »

who said the the PL has a higher profile than the NFL?

You said you don't want the PL to go down the same road as the NFL, which I'm still confused about. What road is that?

MrJoeSoap

prendy wrote: »

and as for the poster who said the PL has a higher profile than NFL....WTF????
a BILLION people watch the superbowl every year.

Nobody said that, what? There is no way on this earth that 1 Billion people watch the Superbowl every year. You going to back that up?

ditpoker

havent read through this thread completely so apologies if it has been mentioned. but why not leave this out of the premier league and maybel apply it to the FA cup.

for example... one of the quarter finals gets played on foreign soil?

Mr Alan

Mr Alan wrote: »

Nothing is "wrong" with the NFL, but American football and Football are two different sports. In the same way i dont think Football should be run or organised like golf is, i dont see the NFLs way of doing things as being one that should be replicated by European leagues in order to simply increase revenue.

Football in Europe has a lot of history and tradition attatched to it, this should not be destroyed by the marketing men who dont really care about the game. (perhaps it already has been)



how many people were watching the X-Factor final? Does that mean that is the way the music industry should be run?

I watched the Superbowl myself(and quite enjoyed it), but it is very "american", for want of a better word. Football shouldnt be.

not typing it up again.

Jazzy

DesF wrote: »

Youa re comparing me to a religious fanatic?

yes because the principle is the same.

DesF wrote:

I don't even know what this means tbh.

I never claim to be "better" than anyone else.

People can do whatever the fúck they want tbh.

well, u have implied many times that you know wat "real fans" are and the expectations that they have to live up to. my whole thing about "level 10" is just ripping the piss cos u seem to have all these fans on different tiers. there is "Olé Olé'rs", "Barstoolers", "TV fans" and right at the creamy summit is u and a select other few LoI'rs (and that INSANE liverpool fan u know) who manage to live up to your expectations and achieve a high Theton level.
just because u live up to your own expectations doesnt give u this divine right to tell other ppl how much they support their club, unless ofc its done in jest. ppl who do that more then usually have their head somewhere very uncomfortable and you wouldnt want to come off looking like that, would you?

MrJoeSoap

ditpoker wrote: »

havent read through this thread completely so apologies if it has been mentioned. but why not leave this out of the premier league and maybel apply it to the FA cup.

for example... one of the quarter finals gets played on foreign soil?

I don't think fans would appreciate it. I know I certainly wouldn't like it if my team made a quarter final and it was moved to Hong Kong or Taiwan.

ditpoker

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

Nobody said that, what? There is no way on this earth that 1 Billion people watch the Superbowl every year. You going to back that up?

you forget that the same 1billion are part of the 8 billion who watched live aid and probably live earth... :rolleyes:

MrJoeSoap

ditpoker wrote: »

you forget that the same 1billion are part of the 8 billion who watched live aid and probably live earth... :rolleyes:

Yeah and the same 1 billion who FIFA claimed watched the World Cup final, only to later be exposed as only a quarter of that figure. I use the term "only" loosely, of course.

MrJoeSoap

Mr Alan wrote: »

not typing it up again.

Sorry, I missed it switching between PC's.

_blank_

Jazzy wrote: »

yes because the principle is the same.

I suppose you are right, in a way.

Football is a religion.

Jazzy wrote: »

well, u have implied many times that you know wat "real fans" are and the expectations that they have to live up to.

No-one has anything to prove to me.

I simply ask questions that are never answered tbh. But now I'm not allowed to ask them, or I'll be banned.

I know what I consider to be a football fan. Why it affects other people so much is the baffling thing.

If it bothers you, or other people, so much, stick me on ignore. Easy.

Jazzy wrote: »

my whole thing about "level 10" is just ripping the piss cos u seem to have all these fans on different tiers. there is "Olé Olé'rs", "Barstoolers", "TV fans" and right at the creamy summit is u and a select other few LoI'rs (and that INSANE liverpool fan u know) who manage to live up to your expectations and achieve a high Theton level.

Level 10? Theton? What are you on about. WTF is a Theton?

Yes, I have zero repsect for clowns who go to games dressed as leprechauns, then try to pretend to be all knowledgeable about the game. I don't like being lied to for a start, or being treated like a moron.

Jazzy wrote: »

just because u live up to your own expectations doesnt give u this divine right to tell other ppl how much they support their club,

I've never done this. Ever.

I couldn't give a flying fúck about people who wear leprechaun suits, or spend thousands to go see a team in a foreign country.

But what I do care about is hyprocisy. I can't stand it.

Jazzy wrote: »

unless ofc its done in jest. ppl who do that more then usually have their head somewhere very uncomfortable and you wouldnt want to come off looking like that, would you?

You think I have my head up my ass?

Care to explain how?

leninbenjamin

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

United had no benefit from playing Chelsea at the end of last season, fixtures-wise.

that's not true really. those matches between the top four have a huge impact on the team from a psychological point of view. remember Arsenal took ages to recover from united ending their unbeaten run? had that United Chelsea game happened earlier in the season and Chelsea won the run in could have been a very different affair.

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

Because of more money? More money doesn't automatically mean better football or a better league.

no but it has had a hell of a lot a difference in the past. but with the EPL clubs being the first to exploit this market it could make it really difficult for the other leagues to compete with them financially in the long run. This isn't just about the extra revenue the games would bring in. This would give even the smallest club in the league more foreign exposure and a better chance of building up a decent foreign fanbase.

Villain wrote:

All 10 extra games would be played abroad under this idea, jesus how about reading the proposal before posting?

what the hell are you on about? each team is playing an extra ten games abroad now? did the BBC change the article?

Fratton Fred

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

I don't think fans would appreciate it. I know I certainly wouldn't like it if my team made a quarter final and it was moved to Hong Kong or Taiwan.

That would most likely be played in cloud cuckoo land that one

This will only make the big clubs richer, lets face, no one will want Reading v Boro so they will end up paying top dollar for the Man U, Liverpool games. The clubs will know this so demand a bigger slice of the kitty?

They will seed the games so the top of the table clash will not happen, but if it does and you have three teams tied for points coming up to this magical last game, will they make them all kick off at the same time, even though they are playing in New York, Dublin and Bangkok?

It aint gonna happen.

MrJoeSoap

Fratton Fred wrote: »

That would most likely be played in cloud cuckoo land that one

You don't reckon we'll beat Bristol Rovers then, no?

Nearly 70 years since your lot got to Wembley* for the Cup Final (*slash Cardiff )

pd101

Can't see it happening for the Premier League because it just would'nt be fair on the teams involved. It could work though with the FA cup where its just a one off game with no points involved in it.

Jazzy

DesF wrote: »

I simply ask questions that are never answered tbh. But now I'm not allowed to ask them, or I'll be banned.

I know what I consider to be a football fan. Why it affects other people so much is the baffling thing.

well, i do answer them but u just generally dont except the answers because they dont live up to your expectations on how u should follow ur club. as for the other morons on here who are more into the never ending war that is Utd. Vs Liverpool I cant really speak for them.
i can tell u tho why it affects other ppl. its because u are telling these passionate ppl that they arent good enough in your eyes and therefore their opinion holds less weight then yours and boom! we are back at the tier system again, and no1 likes that. u shouldnt be telling ppl to ignore u either btw, shows a weakness in ur arguement.

DesF wrote:

Level 10? Theton? What are you on about. WTF is a Theton?

my mistake, i got the spelling wrong Thetans
bit of a joke i made see

Its just making fun at the level u seem to put ppl at. and yes Des, judging by your posts/attitude/arguements - you DO put ppl into different levels and categories where their opinion is weighted simply because of who and how they support their club. wat if i decided to support Shelbourne but didnt go to any matches? what would you think of me? you'd probably just put me into one of the different categories you create.

DesF wrote:

You think I have my head up my ass?

Care to explain how?

Not really, ur just hard to please

Savman

This is a great idea for all leagues. Can't wait for Bohs V Shels @ Wembley.

_blank_

Savman wrote: »

This is a great idea for all leagues. Can't wait for Bohs V Shels @ Wembley.

:D

People probably still wouldn't go.

DEmeant0r

I honestly think this is the most stupid idea come up by the FA, managers and players are already complaining that they're tired from the Xmas run of games, so how could this help them in any way?

LuckyLloyd

Folks, football is a business. For the biggest teams, the diehard fans are irrelevant. This is an excellent way of generating short - term cash and increasing market share in terms of stable long - term revenue. IT IS AN INEVITABILITY, AND NOT SOMETHING THAT YOUR WHINING WILL PREVENT.

I'm surprised the premier league hasn't done this five years ago. All of the teams will eventually sacrifice a game or two a year because of the hard reality of increased merchandising opportunites.

You all need to grow up and realise that business is business - and that means making money. End off. This is a great business idea.

MrJoeSoap

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You all need to grow up and realise that business is business - and that means making money. End off. This is a great business idea.

Classic stuff. The game is nothing more than a business now, so fans should sit back and censor their own opinions on things they feel strongly about. No thanks mate.

Villain

leninbenjamin wrote: »

what the hell are you on about? each team is playing an extra ten games abroad now? did the BBC change the article?

BBC article says:

Those 10 extra games would be played at venues around the world, with cities bidding for the right to stage them

Did you read it?

Savman

LuckyLloyd wrote:

For the biggest teams, the diehard fans are irrelevant.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

IT IS AN INEVITABILITY, AND NOT SOMETHING THAT YOUR WHINING WILL PREVENT.

Hehe, how wrong can one man be? A supporter boycott for just one game could cost a big club a six figure sum in lost revenue, so in reality the opposite of what you say is true. ManU, Chelsea etc don't have total nitwits running them that would think for one second they can survive in any capacity without the diehards.

LuckyLloyd

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

Classic stuff. The game is nothing more than a business now, so fans should sit back and censor their own opinions on things they feel strongly about. No thanks mate.

You can whine all you like, but this is going to happen. And when it does, you'll still go out and buy your replica jerseys; keep up on your sky sports and setanta payments; and take your trip across the water a few times a year.

You can be pushed and prodded - but you still pump the money in. The footballing public isn't very clever.

LuckyLloyd

Savman wrote: »

Hehe, how wrong can one man be? A supporter boycott for just one game could cost a big club a six figure sum in lost revenue, so in reality the opposite of what you say is true. ManU, Chelsea etc don't have total nitwits running them that would think for one second they can survive in any capacity without the diehards.

So the Glazier take over was stopped?

Savman

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

So the Glazier take over was stopped?

Obviously not enough fans felt that strongly about it. Either way a completely different scenario that's hardly relevant.

This could well happen but make no mistake the Premiership clubs will be treading very softly.

~Rebel~

Villain wrote: »

BBC article says:

Did you read it?

Villain and LeninBenjamin you're both saying the same thing. One is saying it from the POV of the league, the other from the POV of any specific team.

Its 1 game i.e each team will play 1 extra game per season abroad.
Its 10 games i.e 10 extra league games will be played in total, with these games being abroad.

Villain

My apologies I thought he meant only one game would be played abroad.

LuckyLloyd

Savman wrote: »

Obviously not enough fans felt that strongly about it. Either way a completely different scenario that's hardly relevant.

This could well happen but make no mistake the Premiership clubs will be treading very softly.

lol. Obviously they didn't. Because the vast majority of the fanbase is passive. Don't you get it? There will never be protests that mean anything, because the other 95% of the fanbase will cross the picket line with their families.

Peyton Manning

I can imagine the big matches, i.e. ones involving United, Chelsea and Liverpool will go to Asia for sure.

DEmeant0r

Look, I'm all for extra money for clubs... but it should not be an extra game that would make or break a club's season (i.e diff between staying up and relegating) and one that could be unfairly fixtured (is that a word?) (i.e What if Arsenal gets the likes of Derby and Man U get Chelsea?)

LuckyLloyd

DEmeant0r wrote: »

Look, I'm all for extra money for clubs... but it should not be an extra game that would make or break a club's season (i.e diff between staying up and relegating) and one that could be unfairly fixtured (is that a word?) (i.e What if Arsenal gets the likes of Derby and Man U get Chelsea?)

All of the overseas games can be scheduled for August and September. Simple.

Mitch Connor

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

All of the overseas games can be scheduled for August and September. Simple.

the timing of the game is almost irrelevant though - it is the fact it is a 39th game that makes it a deal breaker, for me anyway. It doesn't matter when it happens, its the fact teams could get more favourable 'draws' than teams they are competing against, be it for europe, the title or to stay in the league. It is simply wrong, just damned wrong.

Tusky

I find it mind boggling that people are actually advocating this.

LuckyLloyd

Tusky wrote: »

I find it mind boggling that people are actually advocating this.

I'm not advocating it, don't think it is a great idea from a purely footballing perspective tbh (much as Utd should have been forced to fulfill their 3rd round FA Cup fixture with their reserves all those years ago) - but I'm just trying to underline the fact that this is definitely 100% going to happen because it makes sense from a business side of things.

Mitch Connor

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I'm not advocating it, don't think it is a great idea from a purely footballing perspective tbh (much as Utd should have been forced to fulfill their 3rd round FA Cup fixture with their reserves all those years ago) - but I'm just trying to underline the fact that this is definitely 100% going to happen because it makes sense from a business side of things.

not necessarily - would a team fighting relegation really need another game agaisnt United, Liverpool, Arsenal or Chelsea? Could be the game that ultimately sees them go down. would be a very poor decision that.

Savman

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

lol. Obviously they didn't. Because the vast majority of the fanbase is passive. Don't you get it? There will never be protests that mean anything, because the other 95% of the fanbase will cross the picket line with their families.

Go to any well supported club and tell me what a "passive" fan is :rolleyes:
You're completely missing the point here, you said that clubs dont care about the diehards, now I don't know which teams you follow but I can tell you while true for some clubs, that's BS in a lot of cases. I'm sure on a corporate level they don't care personally but if they are running a business then they'll be wary about anything that might cause precious attendances to dwindle. If they can keep doing what they are doing while at the same time expanding to a money making scheme in different countries, of course they'll all grab it with both hands.

But you're simply incorrect stating that their fans don't get factored into decisions like this. The Li family in China isn't gonna be at the games week in week out in the pissing rain, the Smith family from England will. Common sense.

OhNoYouDidn't

whiskeyman wrote: »

Man Yoo Vs Liverpool in Croker anyone?

can you see the bigots allowing that?

actually, can you see the FAI allowing that?

Villain

Top teams will be seeded so chances of Man Utd V Liverpool anywhere are slim although if Liverpool were to drop another place or two ........

Joke lads joke

Call Me Jimmy

MrJoeSoap wrote: »

Nobody said that, what? There is no way on this earth that 1 Billion people watch the Superbowl every year. You going to back that up?

It's a bs stat. In america, around 100 million watch it. Ye think 900 million other people around the world tune in?

mike65

Billion my arse - a billion watch the World Cup and not all together at the same time proberbly.

I have seen comment to suggest this extra round of games would take place in January, which is even madder.

Reaction from various managers/chairmen etc

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/7232856.stm

Mike.

Mr.Nice Guy

Tusky wrote: »

Hilariously awful idea. Would make the premiership unfair for reasons already stated. I cant even believe that some people in this thread are positive about it.

Imagine if utd played Derby 3 times in a season and everyone else twice while Arsenal played Man City 3 times and everyone else twice. How is that fair ?

This is purely to create extra money, greedy ****ers. Are they not making enough as it is ?

Agree 100%. Anyone who thinks the people behind this idea have the best interest of football fans at heart are seriously deluded. It's pure greed and yet another example of money ruining football.

This is the bit that really made my blood boil:

It is understood the additional fixtures could be determined by a draw but that the top-five teams could be seeded to avoid playing each other.

How the F*CK is this in any way fair? The people behind this idea are a disgrace.

invincibleirish

Its an insane idea, whats even more insane is this is surely the first in a line of intiatives? what on earth will follow on from this?

Villain

I remember reading somewhere that more people watch the premier league in Thailand than in the UK, not sure if its true but as I posted earlier The Premier League's income from the sale of overseas TV rights has already increased from £178m in 2001 to £625m for the current deal that runs until 2010.

£625 million now if TV companies are paying that then people must be watching in huge numbers, many fans abroad may even give more finance to clubs through TV revenue and merchandise than home based fans, I agree that those fans who go every week to see their team play are true fans who should be listened to, but what about fans who simply can't get to see matches in the UK?

I don't think 1 extra game per team is the way to go but perhaps another cup just between premier league clubs where all the matches are played around the world, call it the Premier League International cup or something imo thats the only way games should be played abroad.

Savman

Some sense in amongst all the furore:

Lawrie Sanchez wrote:

"The fans here will be up in arms and other national associations won't be too happy about the Premier League coming to their domain and taking sponsors, advertising and revenue from what is their game.

Very vaild point.

Pepe LeFrits

Putting aside the general distaste for playing games who knows where; the 39 game season is ridiculous.

If they are so determined to play games abroad, I think games like the Community shield and various cup games might be a better place to start. Although I'd rather things stay as they are.

Paul Tergat

Tusky wrote: »

I find it mind boggling that people are actually advocating this.

100% agree with you

absolutely stupid idea that should not be even contemplated.

play the English league in England.

it annoys me when UTD go and play friendlies in Asia (like the recent testimonial). Domestically there are clubs who could do with the revenue that a pre-season game brings but yet we go abroad.

invincibleirish

Maybe FIFA or UEFA might be the night in shining armour in this situation and might prevent this happening? Platini surely cant be happy with this?, i know the G14 group of clubs has disbanded but what are the other major leagues and clubs thinking? this means the English clubs getting more money, are Barcelona, Madrid and the Milans to follow? can they afford not to?