Is it time to cut the premier league free?

[big nuts]

I'd stop watching us if they cut off the top division and we wern't in it at the time.

Yes I enjoy the day out, yes I enjoy the football itself, but I go because it's competetive sport. Even if we were in League 2 I'd have the same view, let alone one step away from the Prem.

I cheer a goal because it gets us closer to a win. A win gets us more points and closer to promotion.

The whole POINT is to try and achieve the maximum you can. For that reason I literally couldn't enjoy the matches if, ultimately, we could never get to the top.

It's the exact same viewpoint as when someone says the ridiculous notion of "I don't want us to get to the prem". Why bother watching then? Surely every time we score a goal you're disappointed as thats getting us one step closer to what you don't want?

Perhaps I'm alone in that view.

But instead winning the Championship becomes the ultimate prize. Let the rich boys with the odds stacked in their favour go it alone and eventually eat themselves, whilst the football league can try to go back to the grass roots of the game, fairness in prize money distribution, money for encouraging home grown players etc...

Let City & Chelsea try and conquer the Asian and North America market whilst not giving a flying **** about their own fans and kick off times. Hate to say this but the game I love at the top level died a long time ago and I would rather follow a league with some dignity and where clubs don't hore themselves to foreign investors.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

But instead winning the Championship becomes the ultimate prize. Let the rich boys with the odds stacked in their favour go it alone and eventually eat themselves, whilst the football league can try to go back to the grass roots of the game, fairness in prize money distribution, money for encouraging home grown players etc...

Let City & Chelsea try and conquer the Asian and North America market whilst not giving a flying **** about their own fans and kick off times. Hate to say this but the game I love at the top level died a long time ago and I would rather follow a league with some dignity and where clubs don't hore themselves to foreign investors.

I KNOW we will never WIN the prem in my lifetime unless some miracle happens.....but all the time it is physically possible I want it open to us.

The moment you close off the prem there will be the exact same problem in the Championship which will eventually get it's own tv deal, be rebranded as it's own top division and become a secondary franchise in which new mega clubs emerge. It would be horrendous.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

I KNOW we will never WIN the prem in my lifetime unless some miracle happens.....but all the time it is physically possible I want it open to us.

The moment you close off the prem there will be the exact same problem in the Championship which will eventually get it's own tv deal, be rebranded as it's own top division and become a secondary franchise in which new mega clubs emerge. It would be horrendous.

Well in my lifetime, Chelsea, Man U and Man City have ALL been out of the top flight but in the last few years now dominate the prem, so it can happen.

Cutting the prem loose is daft though, what it needs is a financial realignment - I'd prefer to see the top 4 of the prem all promoted into a European league with the top 4 from Spain, Italy, Germany plus a couple from Turkey, France, Portugal & Celtic maybe. That would then free up the English leagues.

I'd also like to see restriction back in place for number of home-grown players - maybe 50% of the team & bench must be English / British. Sadly European laws [Bosman ruling?] will never allow this.

 

[happypig]

Whilst I can see the reasoning behind the OP's question, I simply cannot see that there's any BHA fans that don't want to see us get promoted; it's what we live and breathe, if only for a couple of hours a week. Going along to watch a team that has hit the peak must have an air of sterility about it, same as it would have for teams like Palace if they were bottom of the prem with no fear of relegation; every game would be like a friendly.
What would even things up a bit would be if parachute payments were abolished and replaced with a system whereby clubs could claim for wages paid to players signed whilst in the Premier league but only for the duration of their contract, so that they couldn't get relegated and continue to spend big, but wouldn't be in financial lumber.

 

[darters74]

I genuinely don't see it happening. You NEED relegation or the league would stagnate very quickly.

100% this.

 

[B.W.]

No. Football needs dreams to be alive. The fans of 72 league teams will have their dreams destroyed if the Prem is 'cut free'. Meanwhile, many of the teams already there will have nothing to play for (currently, it is about survival for at least half of the Prem). What a ridiculous state of affairs that would be.

 

[B.W.]

Whilst I can see the reasoning behind the OP's question, I simply cannot see that there's any BHA fans that don't want to see us get promoted; it's what we live and breathe, if only for a couple of hours a week. Going along to watch a team that has hit the peak must have an air of sterility about it, same as it would have for teams like Palace if they were bottom of the prem with no fear of relegation; every game would be like a friendly.
What would even things up a bit would be if parachute payments were abolished and replaced with a system whereby clubs could claim for wages paid to players signed whilst in the Premier league but only for the duration of their contract, so that they couldn't get relegated and continue to spend big, but wouldn't be in financial lumber.

I like that idea.

 

[Husty]

If the prem was to do this I think they'd have to simultaneously bring in a draft system like the US sports have or something similar and I can't see that going down well.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

[/I][/B]

I like that idea.

But, if I was the relegated club, there would be literally no incentive to move players on if I was relegated. I would know their wages were covered.

At the moment there is an incentive to move them on.

A relegated team gets £60m over 4 seasons or, £15m a season.

Thats only £288k a week income. That would only cover the wages of 6 players on around £48k a week which is not a huge premier league wage.

Therefore, the parachute payments, although a lot of money, in no way cover the cost of a premier league team's wage bill. It is still MASSIVLY in the clubs interest to get people off their wage bill.

As an example QPR had a wage bill of £56m before the likes of Remy and Samba joined.

So QPR could have been relegated and refused to release ANY ofd their players, therefore having a brilliant team, and KNOW that their £60m wage bill was covered, compared to trying to get by on £15m a season? I don't think that's fair at all.

 

[B.W.]

But, if I was the relegated club, there would be literally no incentive to move players on if I was relegated. I would know their wages were covered.

At the moment there is an incentive to move them on.

A relegated team gets £60m over 4 seasons or, £15m a season.

Thats only £288k a week income. That would only cover the wages of 6 players on around £48k a week which is not a huge premier league wage.

Therefore, the parachute payments, although a lot of money, in no way cover the cost of a premier league team's wage bill. It is still MASSIVLY in the clubs interest to get people off their wage bill.

As an example QPR had a wage bill of £56m before the likes of Remy and Samba joined.

So QPR could have been relegated and refused to release ANY ofd their players, therefore having a brilliant team, and KNOW that their £60m wage bill was covered, compared to trying to get by on £15m a season? I don't think that's fair at all.

Well, cap the reimbursement then. The parachute system clearly doesn't work. There must be a better alternative IMHO.

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

I'd prefer to see the oil rich super clubs get the **** out into a euro league.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Well, cap the reimbursement then. The parachute system clearly doesn't work. There must be a better alternative IMHO.

What about capping the re-imbursment at say £15m a season? Ah, As I said before, that would cover 6 players who were signed in the premier league on £48k a week.

Seems quite reasonable to me.


The parachute payments are excellent in my opinion. As a football fan I want to know that if my club goes up, they can at least throw A BIT of wonga at it in an attempt to stay up. If the paracute payments wern't in place, teams wouldnt DARE risk buying better players on better contracts for fear of going down and being in a horrendous financial situation.

 

[B.W.]

The point is that reimbursement ensures clubs don't spend spend spend once relegated. Hence why I prefer that idea to the failing parachute payments system

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

The point is that reimbursement ensures clubs don't spend spend spend once relegated. Hence why I prefer that idea to the failing parachute payments system

Why is the parachute system failing?

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Why is the parachute system failing?

Because it rewards failure and removes the necessity for clubs to bank some of their income ( to cover relegation ) and thus fuels wage increases.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Because it rewards failure and removes the necessity for clubs to bank some of their income ( to cover relegation ) and thus fuels wage increases.

The Premiership relegation places have been filled by at least one newly promoted club in all but 2 of the 20 seasons since its introduction. This shows it is BLOODY difficult to stay in the league. Clubs have to push the boundaries financially to establish themselves.

Parachute payments are vital in allowing the promoted clubs belief that they can actually have an attempt at buying players without the fear of going completely tits up and out of business if they are relegated.

Would you say Hull, Cardiff and Palace have gone CRAZY on transfers and wages? Yes they've bought people but they certainly aren't being OUTRAGEOUS. They are all making a calculated gamble but at least know that, if it goes wrong, they wont go out of business immediately. QPR have skewed this perception of Parachute payments, but if you actually loook at the sheer amount of wages they have offloaded this season, it is CRAZY. The Premiership relegation places have been filled by at least one newly promoted club in all but 2 of the 20 seasons since its introduction

It's not rewarding failure, its an extended reward of making it to the top division in the first place.

 

[B.W.]

Because it rewards failure and removes the necessity for clubs to bank some of their income ( to cover relegation ) and thus fuels wage increases.

And creates an uneven playing field in the Championship I might add. And fails to stop clubs from over-committing and getting into severe financial problems. Other than that, it's perfect! ;-).

 

[B.W.]

The Premiership relegation places have been filled by at least one newly promoted club in all but 2 of the 20 seasons since its introduction. This shows it is BLOODY difficult to stay in the league. Clubs have to push the boundaries financially to establish themselves.

Parachute payments are vital in allowing the promoted clubs belief that they can actually have an attempt at buying players without the fear of going completely tits up and out of business if they are relegated.

Would you say Hull, Cardiff and Palace have gone CRAZY on transfers and wages? Yes they've bought people but they certainly aren't being OUTRAGEOUS. They are all making a calculated gamble but at least know that, if it goes wrong, they wont go out of business immediately. QPR have skewed this perception of Parachute payments, but if you actually loook at the sheer amount of wages they have offloaded this season, it is CRAZY. The Premiership relegation places have been filled by at least one newly promoted club in all but 2 of the 20 seasons since its introduction

It's not rewarding failure, its an extended reward of making it to the top division in the first place.

So you wouldn't change it, despite there being numerous examples of clubs completely ****ing up their finances with the promise of receiving these payments?

I would suggest that is complacent in the extreme.

Oh, and it IS a reward for failure, since it is triggered by relegation, not promotion.

 

[keaton]

So you wouldn't change it, despite there being numerous examples of clubs completely ****ing up their finances with the promise of receiving these payments?

I would suggest that is complacent in the extreme.

Oh, and it IS a reward for failure, since it is triggered by relegation, not promotion.

Aren't the clubs chuffing up their finances to gain promotion not gain promototion so they can get relegated?

If you took away parachute payments teams will still spend hugely to get promoted.

Your second point makes next to no sense

 

[B.W.]

Aren't the clubs chuffing up their finances to gain promotion not gain promototion so they can get relegated?

If you took away parachute payments teams will still spend hugely to get promoted.

Your second point makes next to no sense

They want promotion, knowing they will be handsomely rewarded whether they stay up or not. However, if the worse happens, they get a ridiculous additional reward.

My second point is key, and makes complete sense. It IS complacent to assume that parachute payments is the one and only best way to deal with the huge difference in financial rewards of Prem vs FL.