Jump to content

SPFL clubs invest in independent advice on strategic review


Carl Fredrickson

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, LarrysRightFoot said:

You would think in this woke and esg age tv companies and sponsors would be turning away from the OF. Scottish footballs hierarchy just keep promoting them as ‘Scottish football’ though. 
 

Time for something positive and fresh, equitable and competitive. 

It never fails to amaze me that all these companies, sponsors, SFA, SPFL, Scottish media, other Scottish clubs - fall over themselves to accommodate the uglies and their bile.... but if the EPL came calling, they'd be off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 298
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Rogue Daddy

    30

  • GinRummy

    14

  • Smith's right boot

    12

  • John Findlay

    11

Smith's right boot
4 hours ago, WageThief said:

 

Why would Amazon want to take over coverage of a league while demanding it reduced the number of big games and equal coverage for all teams?  All the while paying more than twice the current price.

 

I mean, I agree such a setup would be better but it wouldn't make more money.  

 

 

Might do in the term. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Smith's right boot
Just now, Rogue Daddy said:

It never fails to amaze me that all these companies, sponsors, SFA, SPFL, Scottish media, other Scottish clubs - fall over themselves to accommodate the uglies and their bile.... but if the EPL came calling, they'd be off.

 

 

They're all like a partner that gets abused., especially the clubs

 

Get treated like shite, threaten to leave, batter them ( on the pitch), but all the companies you mention will bend over backwards to accommodate them. 

 

 

Tbh, Scotland in general has that mentality. 

 

No ambition, lack of faith in own ability and thinks they need someone else to make them better. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Interesting from Tom English (the whole thing not just that sentence) especially when he talks the difference in mentality from the traditional Scottish owners and the American ones. Certainly there has been a prevailing attitude of dont rock the boat, all the matters is the next few weeks for finance, as long as we have that then everything is fine. 

Yes, TE sums this thing up very well.     While the other 4 clubs are run by new American "outsiders",  Hearts are also run by  a board containing 2 experienced business people from outside the  traditional Scottish football  bubble - Ann Budge & James Anderson.     

 

It was obvious from the SPFL's response last year to Ann's offer to introduce a benefactor (JA) willing to help Scottish football survive Covid that they were surprised/disbelieving/embarrassed - maybe they even mocked her in the same way Dick Gordon and Willie Miller did on Sportsound.    To me, that summed up how outdated  and unfit for purpose our governance is.

 

Who knows what will come from this Deloitte review - and they seemed to have been the source of a good few Sellick influencers, along with Harper McLeod - but I think its a step in the right direction which might embarrass the SPFL if nothing else.

 

Doncaster showed that his brass neck is as shiny as ever  with this quote at the end of the TE article - "We wholeheartedly welcome and support any initiative that has the good of the game at its heart."

     

Aye right, Neil.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
Smith's right boot
1 hour ago, RENE said:

 

Doesn't half of it go to the Premier League and half that goes to the Old Firm?

 

I checked some figures, outdated no doubt by a few years now but 46-49% of all the prize and TV money went the way of Celtic and rangers, it was 3 seasons. 

 

So from a purely financial point of view any  deal that was over 53% of that  without the of would benefit the clubs or leave them the same as they are - TV and prize money wise. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jonesy said:

St Mirren - minority Aztecs. Used to laying down when their god (Celtic) comes a-calling. Also, not convinced that child sacrifice is completely unheard of in contemporary Paisley. 

🤣🤣🤣

Genius!

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

I checked some figures, outdated no doubt by a few years now but 46-49% of all the prize and TV money went the way of Celtic and rangers, it was 3 seasons. 

 

So from a purely financial point of view any  deal that was over 53% of that  without the of would benefit the clubs or leave them the same as they are - TV and prize money wise. 

 

 

To be fair that amount by goes to whoever finishes 1st and 2nd in the Premiership. 😎

Link to post
Share on other sites
Smith's right boot
21 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

To be fair that amount by goes to whoever finishes 1st and 2nd in the Premiership. 😎

 

 

Yeah, it was prize money and TV money. 

 

Point still stands tho. 

 

Financially a deal could be around 50% less without the of and the clubs would be the same. 

 

The difference is, instead of getting £2m or whatever it is for 3rd, we'd get it for first. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jim Panzee said:

In my experience it's been more like:

 

"you have a watch. they ask you the time. you tell them the time. they tell you the time back accompanied with an invoice"...

 

 

Yeah an invoice for a considerable amount or/ and a retainer for their specialist services. Most have some inflated opinions of themselves 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A waste of our money. Literally throwing OUR money away.

Scottish football is crying out for change

Deloitte Toche will say it a great idea and here's how to do it...

Uglies say "Naw" 

The End.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Deid Heid said:

A waste of our money. Literally throwing OUR money away.

Scottish football is crying out for change

Deloitte Toche will say it a great idea and here's how to do it...

Uglies say "Naw" 

The End.

Re your 2nd para -agree.

BUT the 5 clubs must be aware what will happen and that SFA/ersecheecks will say "Naw".

So they must have a plan B.

Please let them have a plan B.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, lost in space said:

Re your 2nd para -agree.

BUT the 5 clubs must be aware what will happen and that SFA/ersecheecks will say "Naw".

So they must have a plan B.

Please let them have a plan B.....

Tom English said in his piece that if they didn’t get anywhere constructive they would consider a break away (see further up).👍 

 

"The prospect of a breakaway league has been mentioned as a last ditch scenario, an emergency measure to be re-examined more closely if they feel they are getting nowhere."

Edited by Rogue Daddy
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rogue Daddy said:

I'm only using Amazon as an example as JA has (or did have) close ties with them. I'm also trying to make the point that with such an offer, it should allow them input to a more competitive and fairer set up in the Scottish game. It may not benefit them initially, but hopefully they have a lot of minds smarter than the SPFL - and can come up with some decent ideas to promote our game. I keep hearing it's being undersold - but we have a lot to offer.... maybe, just maybe, someone can see worth in our game. As for the 300mill.... it could just as easily be 150mill or 175 mill... I just plucked a figure out of the air. But I am of the opinion that SKY are holding us back. Most of the games are OF, thereby most of the money goes to the OF, the league is set up to suit 4 televised OF games. 

Like I said, whatever the figure, we just hope that someone out there can see value in our game ... even although it's blighted with OF bias.

 

Fair enough.  It seems optimistic, but I suppose other things have changed quickly like English football with Sky money and I suppose loads of other sports too.

 

I think we need a better split of TV money and a far more even split of prize money for league placing.  It is more likely to happen with a sort of SPFL online tv thing imo.  But unless the arsecheeks are as popular across the world as they like to believe, it's unlikely to even things up much.

 

I think in order to make the league truly competitive with TV you'd need whoever it was investing a certain amount evenly across the clubs that meant matchday revenue was pretty irrelevant. And that would be a pretty high amount.  You'd want our average wage up at 15k per week or so.  St Johnstone at 10k per week.  The OF would still pay more obviously but the margins would be finer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jamboinglasgow
47 minutes ago, LarrysRightFoot said:

 

Sounds like Henry McLeish is just gutted that no one asked him to do it.

 

Also rich the daily record going at 5 clubs and self interest but never at the ultimate cabal of self interest that is the Old Firm, the reason Scottish football is in the position it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

I checked some figures, outdated no doubt by a few years now but 46-49% of all the prize and TV money went the way of Celtic and rangers, it was 3 seasons. 

 

So from a purely financial point of view any  deal that was over 53% of that  without the of would benefit the clubs or leave them the same as they are - TV and prize money wise. 

Those figure are well out of date.  They changed in season 2013/14.

 

The share of the SPFL prize money going to Premiership clubs is now 82.25% split as follows:

1 13.40%
2 9.60%
3 8.25%
4 7.25%
5 6.75%
6 6.25%
7 5.75%
8 5.50%
9 5.25%
10 5.00%
11 4.75%
12 4.50%

 

The distribution model isn't as bad as it was (it used to be 1st 17%, 2nd 15%, 3rd 9.5%), although the EPL is more equitable, with the top club receiving approximately 1.6 times that of the bottom side.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Smith's right boot
24 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

Those figure are well out of date.  They changed in season 2013/14.

 

The share of the SPFL prize money going to Premiership clubs is now 82.25% split as follows:

1 13.40%
2 9.60%
3 8.25%
4 7.25%
5 6.75%
6 6.25%
7 5.75%
8 5.50%
9 5.25%
10 5.00%
11 4.75%
12 4.50%

 

The distribution model isn't as bad as it was (it used to be 1st 17%, 2nd 15%, 3rd 9.5%), although the EPL is more equitable, with the top club receiving approximately 1.6 times that of the bottom side.

 

 

Does that include TV money? 

 

The one I seen added the prize revenue and TV money together. 

 

How much is prize money and how much is TV money from the total pot? 

 

Edit-

Seen its £25 m prize money and only £2.1m TV money? 

 

Seen another report that has around £8m in TV money going to the clubs, the of being on TV every week will get most of that. 

 

Out of  the total pot of £32m, it may be closer to around 40% going to 2 clubs. 

 

 

 

Edited by Smith's right boot
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Sounds like Henry McLeish is just gutted that no one asked him to do it.

 

Also rich the daily record going at 5 clubs and self interest but never at the ultimate cabal of self interest that is the Old Firm, the reason Scottish football is in the position it is.

 

Their hypocrisy is monumental and as for McLeish, he can stick to his "plan" to better Scottish Football, without disturbing the Bigot Brothers of course, which the current set up have basically ignored, after all, don't want a real challenge to the duopoly and the Wunderkid, Doncaster bring called out for what he is, a failure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Smith's right boot said:

Does that include TV money? 

 

The one I seen added the prize revenue and TV money together. 

 

How much is prize money and how much is TV money from the total pot? 

All the revenue that the SPFL gets from sponsorship (excluding the league cup), TV money, play-off levies etc. all all goes into the one pot and is distributed (after expenses) to clubs based on their final position in the league structure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Smith's right boot
2 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

All the revenue that the SPFL gets from sponsorship (excluding the league cup), TV money, play-off levies etc. all all goes into the one pot and is distributed (after expenses) to clubs based on their final position in the league structure.

 

 

Does seem better. Apparently £540k average between the two clubs per game as well v Sweden £100k per game .

 

However the OF are on TV every week so between the two you could get an average of how much tv money they get between them v the rest of the league x the number of games. 

 

Something for me to do Tommorrow. 😳

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

Also rich the daily record going at 5 clubs and self interest but never at the ultimate cabal of self interest that is the Old Firm, the reason Scottish football is in the position it is.

 

I would suggest if the record is going at the 5 clubs, it will be because either one of, or both rangers and Celtic have put out that narrative. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LarrysRightFoot said:

Dermott editor of the Daily Record here. We are doing a piece by Henry McLeish on this SPFL review commissioned by these FIVE EAST COAST CLUBS, Henry is not quite sure what their motives are. So, what slant would you like us to put on it for you?

Link to post
Share on other sites


He said: “I have serious doubts about what’s happening. Financial resilience is critical and should be done by the football authorities.”

 

Thats the story right there. Why are 5 clubs investing their money into something the football authorities should be doing as part of their roles?

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:


He said: “I have serious doubts about what’s happening. Financial resilience is critical and should be done by the football authorities.”

 

Thats the story right there. Why are 5 clubs investing their money into something the football authorities should be doing as part of their roles?

If they were capable of doing that, we wouldn't be having a review.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, John Findlay said:

If they were capable of doing that, we wouldn't be having a review.


So that’s the real story here. 5 major clubs feel forced to take action because our authorities are doing nothing to help the game. 
 

Problem with Doncaster is that he has no motivation for the game to truly grow. He earns a massive salary, plus bonus, and is happy to feed out of the old firm trough. When he leaves this job he will slip into another executive role down south. Unlike the representatives of the 5 clubs, his livelihood and investments are protected no matter what.
 

He’s not even Scottish so has zero emotional motivation for Scotland to do well either. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
LarrysRightFoot
8 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Sounds like Henry McLeish is just gutted that no one asked him to do it.

 

Also rich the daily record going at 5 clubs and self interest but never at the ultimate cabal of self interest that is the Old Firm, the reason Scottish football is in the position it is.

Yep, the way they spin things for clickbait is typical - red tops are getting worse. They don’t care what they say, just as long as people read it. More faces than Big Ben. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, WageThief said:

 

Fair enough.  It seems optimistic, but I suppose other things have changed quickly like English football with Sky money and I suppose loads of other sports too.

 

I think we need a better split of TV money and a far more even split of prize money for league placing.  It is more likely to happen with a sort of SPFL online tv thing imo.  But unless the arsecheeks are as popular across the world as they like to believe, it's unlikely to even things up much.

 

I think in order to make the league truly competitive with TV you'd need whoever it was investing a certain amount evenly across the clubs that meant matchday revenue was pretty irrelevant. And that would be a pretty high amount.  You'd want our average wage up at 15k per week or so.  St Johnstone at 10k per week.  The OF would still pay more obviously but the margins would be finer.

 

genuine question - why would / should st j get £5k a week less than us? (apols if I've missed something as not read the whole thread). 

 

is the objective not to share out the cash evenly?

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:


So that’s the real story here. 5 major clubs feel forced to take action because our authorities are doing nothing to help the game. 
 

Problem with Doncaster is that he has no motivation for the game to truly grow. He earns a massive salary, plus bonus, and is happy to feed out of the old firm trough. When he leaves this job he will slip into another executive role down south. Unlike the representatives of the 5 clubs, his livelihood and investments are protected no matter what.
 

He’s not even Scottish so has zero emotional motivation for Scotland to do well either. 

I don't think his nationality has anything to do with it. He was shooed in by Lawell to do Celtic's bidding. As, loathe as I am to give him any sort of credit, he did their bidding very well.

I feel as soon as Lawell went, then Doncaster knew the writing was on the wall for him.

Now Celtic are seen as being weak in the corridors of power, the other arse cheek will be salivating at the opportunity for them to be the Godfather now, the only thing is they don't currently have the same financial muscle as they once had, or despite the pandemic, their neighbours in the Eaat End of Glasgow.

There is an opportunity here to really shake up the governance of Scottish football and make it fairer for all.

I just sincerely hope Scottish football don't waste the opportunity, but alas history tells me otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

Sounds like Henry McLeish is just gutted that no one asked him to do it.

 

Also rich the daily record going at 5 clubs and self interest but never at the ultimate cabal of self interest that is the Old Firm, the reason Scottish football is in the position it is.

Exactly. The interests of all 42 clubs has never been the goal. The interest of 2 has. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Jim Panzee said:

 

genuine question - why would / should st j get £5k a week less than us? (apols if I've missed something as not read the whole thread). 

 

is the objective not to share out the cash evenly?

 

Because they have about 30 fans and they already pay about 5k less per week (OK not quite so much but roughly).  I was referring to how much they would ideally pay in wages not get in TV money.  TV money will never completely get rid of commercial differences between clubs.  Even in England clubs move to larger stadiums to make more matchday cash.

 

I was picking the figure a bit randomly as I don't know where the tipping point is in footballers where you start getting much less for doubling wages.  I.e. They are all very very decent.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Glamorgan Jambo

I have no real expectations for this report but also little real idea of the context and brief for Deloitte from the vague and general description in the press release.

 

There are obviously way too many clubs in the elite structure but also there is a distorted and disproportionate difficulty in ambitious clubs entering the set up. I’m pretty sure it was only after arbitration that the pyramid play off went ahead last season after all sorts of games about where Brechin would go when they were demoted.

 

And then from nowhere every season comes proposals about Rangers and Celtic colts in the league set up. And odd rulings about clubs being able to skip league games for pre season tournaments overseas or even winter training breaks.

 

We'll see what happens but the absence of the gruesome twosome from the exercise is very telling. Along with the lukewarm and conditional support of Doncaster and the odd intervention of Henry McLeish.

Edited by Glamorgan Jambo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Football in Scotland needs reviewed from the bottom up, I'm involved in grassroots and there are still far too many guys playing out failed football dreams through their kids.  The win at all costs over development of players is still prevalent in lots of local and community clubs.  Lots of coaches play long ball into the opposition goal keeper hoping for mistakes and "get stuck intae thum" is heard often at 8/9/10 year old.

 

Until its sorted from the bottom up we will never have a product at the level which we all want and crave.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, WageThief said:

 

Because they have about 30 fans and they already pay about 5k less per week (OK not quite so much but roughly).  I was referring to how much they would ideally pay in wages not get in TV money.  TV money will never completely get rid of commercial differences between clubs.  Even in England clubs move to larger stadiums to make more matchday cash.

 

I was picking the figure a bit randomly as I don't know where the tipping point is in footballers where you start getting much less for doubling wages.  I.e. They are all very very decent.

 

 

 

 

OK - get where you're coming from now - I think. You're suggesting TV money to offset match day revenue - which is pretty much driven by crowd attendance / off pitch sales?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Smith's right boot
3 hours ago, Nookie Bear said:


He said: “I have serious doubts about what’s happening. Financial resilience is critical and should be done by the football authorities.”

 

Thats the story right there. Why are 5 clubs investing their money into something the football authorities should be doing as part of their roles?

 

 

Correct, our folk governing the game are pointless, they eat, drink, get aid and are quite happy doing nothing until they get their pension. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nookie Bear said:


He said: “I have serious doubts about what’s happening. Financial resilience is critical and should be done by the football authorities.”

 

Thats the story right there. Why are 5 clubs investing their money into something the football authorities should be doing as part of their roles?

That's a very good question... maybe any journo's looking in (worth their salt) can ask the SPFL? If not, maybe one of the English papers will pick it up.... which is probably more likely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In very basic terms, if Hearts got £1m more per annum from a TV deal/league spons etc, that would be £20k more per week.

 

Equate that to players and 4 x £2k players are replaced with 4 x £6k players.

 

That's a massive uplift to our first XI.

 

Filter that down the table, it'll be a similar uplift in quality.

 

Up the quality, up the attraction - it's all connected.

 

We also as a nation have a better chance, with those better players, to progress further in Europe, so the 3rd-5th clubs in the league bring in yet more money.  And also the good ol' co-effishunt goes up giving more chance to more teams to get into that cash.

 

All of this also increases reputation, great for sponsorship.

 

Also allows more infrastructure, you'd hope better kids coming through.

 

Then teams can also hold on to those kids and only sell them at their real value (more money), and the lads themselves also leave at a better time for their career, when they're more ready for the rigours of a higher standard (which is no longer English L1).

 

It's all connected.

 

The fact Doncaster and both his masters and cabal - and their predecessors - have undersold our game for all these years is the main reason we are where we are.

 

When England went all glitzy in 1992, at a point we weren't far from on par with them (Rangers beat their champs that year or year before), we just rolled over and died.  Tickle our tummy and you get our product - it's shit anyway, right.

 

Anyone, McLeish included calling this self-interest just isn't getting it.  Yes it IS SELF INTEREST.  Of course it is!!!!!  What's the other option?  Keep taking the hand-me-downs and scraps?  More money in our game, properly distributed is the aim, and it's the only thing that can raise us from the doldrums.  The 5 clubs should only be applauded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Deid Heid said:

A waste of our money. Literally throwing OUR money away.

Scottish football is crying out for change

Deloitte Toche will say it a great idea and here's how to do it...

Uglies say "Naw" 

The End.

 

Nailed it, sadly.

 

Only winner here is likely to be Deloitte.

 

The game needs a root and branch overhaul but neither the OF, nor Doncaster, would be beneficiaries.

 

They'd rather go in the opposite direction, improve their own lot further, and make the other clubs even bigger stooges than we are now.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nookie Bear said:


He said: “I have serious doubts about what’s happening. Financial resilience is critical and should be done by the football authorities.”

 

Thats the story right there. Why are 5 clubs investing their money into something the football authorities should be doing as part of their roles?

 

Can't afford it on top of Doncsster's £400k status quo incentive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, WageThief said:

 

Fair enough.  It seems optimistic, but I suppose other things have changed quickly like English football with Sky money and I suppose loads of other sports too. - yeah, it all comes down to marketing your product successfully - providing a product that's worth investing in -  this, apparently, doesn't seem part of the spfl's remit.

 

I think we need a better split of TV money and a far more even split of prize money for league placing.  It is more likely to happen with a sort of SPFL online tv thing imo.  But unless the arsecheeks are as popular across the world as they like to believe, it's unlikely to even things up much. - agree, TV money should be an even spit. Each team should have the same amount of games televised with an equal share of monies. Simple. Unfortunately, SKY don't want that, the spfl don't want that, and the uglies don't want that.

 

I think in order to make the league truly competitive with TV you'd need whoever it was investing a certain amount evenly across the clubs that meant matchday revenue was pretty irrelevant. And that would be a pretty high amount.  You'd want our average wage up at 15k per week or so.  St Johnstone at 10k per week.  The OF would still pay more obviously but the margins would be finer. - but this is exactly it. You know, even if it was a level playing field - before a ball is kicked - each season, it would make a difference. Not a huge difference, but a slight difference all the same. But that's avoided like the plague to keep the uglies happy. Everything in Scottish football is done for the sake of 2 teams... the same 2 teams that would jump ship at even a sniff of a chance to join another league. 

The OF have bigger supports and will always have more money. I get that and accept it. What is just plain wrong, is a governing body running Scottish football to suit these 2 teams. 36 years since a team outside of THEM has won the league? That's just embarrassing... and if that doesn't scream CHANGE REQUIRED nothing will.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

In very basic terms, if Hearts got £1m more per annum from a TV deal/league spons etc, that would be £20k more per week.

 

Equate that to players and 4 x £2k players are replaced with 4 x £6k players.

 

That's a massive uplift to our first XI.

 

Filter that down the table, it'll be a similar uplift in quality.

 

Up the quality, up the attraction - it's all connected.

 

We also as a nation have a better chance, with those better players, to progress further in Europe, so the 3rd-5th clubs in the league bring in yet more money.  And also the good ol' co-effishunt goes up giving more chance to more teams to get into that cash.

 

All of this also increases reputation, great for sponsorship.

 

Also allows more infrastructure, you'd hope better kids coming through.

 

Then teams can also hold on to those kids and only sell them at their real value (more money), and the lads themselves also leave at a better time for their career, when they're more ready for the rigours of a higher standard (which is no longer English L1).

 

It's all connected.

 

The fact Doncaster and both his masters and cabal - and their predecessors - have undersold our game for all these years is the main reason we are where we are.

 

When England went all glitzy in 1992, at a point we weren't far from on par with them (Rangers beat their champs that year or year before), we just rolled over and died.  Tickle our tummy and you get our product - it's shit anyway, right.

 

Anyone, McLeish included calling this self-interest just isn't getting it.  Yes it IS SELF INTEREST.  Of course it is!!!!!  What's the other option?  Keep taking the hand-me-downs and scraps?  More money in our game, properly distributed is the aim, and it's the only thing that can raise us from the doldrums.  The 5 clubs should only be applauded.

Good post! ...and you're right, investment doesn't have to huge (by todays standards or EPL size) to make a difference. It also has to be FAIR... something that has been sadly lacking for years.

 

Your last 3 paragraphs should be stapled to dungcasters heid!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jim Panzee said:

OK - get where you're coming from now - I think. You're suggesting TV money to offset match day revenue - which is pretty much driven by crowd attendance / off pitch sales?

 

 

 

Yeah.  To be more concrete I am saying that until TV money reaches a level where the match day revenue makes tiny differences to the quality of player a club brings in, splitting it evenly (obviously the correct thing) will make little difference to competition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly this is doomed to fail, as with recent votes reconstructions etc everyone knows that the thing is being run by idiots but no one is brave enough to actually make a change. This report will come back with several recommendations that will all be squashed by the old firm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hagar the Horrible

I can seriously understand all views on this one, Everybody is sceptical and there is a natural defence mode on we are just going to get hurt again and will this come back to bite us on the backside again.

 

But I am taking the emotion out of this one and ask the questions why now?  Well why not now? The problem is not just about how we were shafted, and we don’t forget and forgive.   But there are still some unanswered questions and I want them exposed. Now I don’t think this will be that mechanism, However it might lead to that.  I am going to put this out in a section of posts rather than one huge one as each item is worthy of debate.

 

I think nothing will come of this, club chairmen are drones, the OF pound drives them.  What I want to happen is to call the OF’s bluff and a better distribution of cash and better deals to boot, if the OF are not happy then a breakaway league and see who will pick up the OF as they are not wanted anywhere!!!!

 

However if we get revenge on the organist rather than the monkey then job done, even better if this is the organist gets lamped with his own organ and the monkey shoved up his arse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rogue Daddy said:

The OF have bigger supports and will always have more money. I get that and accept it. What is just plain wrong, is a governing body running Scottish football to suit these 2 teams. 36 years since a team outside of THEM has won the league? That's just embarrassing... and if that doesn't scream CHANGE REQUIRED nothing will.

 

I totally agree that change is required, just dont see it coming from a money making media tycoon.

 

Sky haven't gone out their way to be kind to English football.  They've got lucky in ways, and done well in others.  But there was no grand plan from Murdoch et al to make the league fairer.

 

The SPFL dont market the game well, but it isn't simply a case that with the right marketing the Scottish game can be like the game in England.  Does Sky/etc even show an equal number of Man City games as they do Burnley games?

 

I am for an 18 team league and various other things I have never witnessed (like a non OF team winning the league) but I don't think it's simply a case of marketing the game better and suddenly people want to watch St Johnstone, or Morton.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hagar the Horrible

Timings

I think the timing is suspect, its clear this is not just something they have been discussing the last couple of weeks,  Aberdeen were lied to when they were told their vote does not matter as they had the requisite votes.  Dundee were promised the Earth, and has their reward been fulfilled?.  The Arabs I can also understand as part of the Calpol 3, but they had the chance to vote for reconstruction, chose not to! But its clear nobody can be happy with the TV deal  but Doncaster has limited our marketplace to just 1 by falling out with the others, that must be sack-able surely.?

 

Is this because Celtic are now at their weakest?   Liewell has gone or has he?  he is still pulling the strings at the Brendanbowl, hence the new guy lasted 10 weeks.  Celtic and MacLennan have controlled the narrative with their tame idiot. Internally they have their own trouble to seek. This IS the investigation that Rangers had called for but additionally looking into the financial practices as our product is undersold as well.

 

So why is it been driven by THEM? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hagar the Horrible

So lets look at the “THEM”, OK we are in bed with the Yanks, but as the UK’s biggest fans owned club we have the right to want and demand a fair crack at the whip.  Yes we are keeping our friends close and our enemies closer.  Yes they are our enemies, but Yanks don’t hold grudges in business, the biggest problem I have is they are not usually bright; having new money does not increase intelligence.  They won’t get the setup we have nor the passion.  We are not NFL fans accepting our club going from Oakland to LA, then back to Oakland and 5 minutes in LV.  They will have a franchise sooner or later in London.  They don’t get we are tribal, bred into a one club or another.  But I do get marketing is their big thing and they are so much better at it than us.  Natural born salesmen.  But our Soccerball franchise does need to change, The distribution of wealth needs to be the same.  Yes merit and ability should be rewarded, whereas in the NFL the worst team is rewarded with first draft to keep things competitive. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hagar the Horrible

Past reviews

McLeish has a nerve slamming us, so what if we want more money, or at least a better deal , the deal is seriously crap. Strange though we are slammed but the daily gossip snippet in the gossip section of the BBC alludes it to criticism of the OF and the other 35 clubs.  Mcleish’s own review listened to fans who wanted an expanded league, his review recommended a return to a 10 team top flight,  Yeah Henry…way to go.  It was tedious.  Also the current deal is say £10m  if you finish 3rd you will get 8.25%  at £825k, Whereas if we maximise revenue and doubled deal the team finishing 6th will get £1,250,000.  Do the Maths (its plural for the benefit of the Yanks).

 

The fact that we need and are paying for this process ourselves is because the vote failed after the rousing speech by Celtic.   I said it at the time, for governance to work certain clubs complained it should have been dealt with not voted down.  It only needed a proposer and 2 others to second it for it to happen when there was an allegation of wrong doing.  You don’t need a majority vote when a vast majority were subject of the complaint.  to get the SPFL to pay for it, the 5 clubs need only demand it, that’s good governance.  If you put in a grievance complaint at work, you don’t get the person who the grievance is against to investigate it.  We need the diddy clubs to stop having Paisley Syndrome

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hagar the Horrible

Finally

 

This review must have 2 outcomes, one regime change, Doncaster is harming the league, he has fallen out with the TV companies, it’s clear he does not understand contracts otherwise his Armageddon calling on leagues to finish early was either a blatant lie or gross incompetence.  The other outcome must be ditching the Cinch deal and replacing that and the TV deal with something more in keeping with how we value our product, We have to be bigger than the left sleeve of Spurs, and on a comparison with the LTA and ECB both Global, however Festivals including the Edinburgh sessions and Northampton Saints whatever they are (don’t reply its rhetorical).  The deal itself is the worst deal in 20 years.  We have had the BoS, Clydesdale, and Ladbrokes, but this in real terms is far less.  Somebody must be getting a backhander to accept such a crap deal?  Rangers are complaining about it but not their other arse cheek?  Narrows that down a bit.  Something is wrong, criminally wrong, by this being financed and driven by us, I will accept the outcome more readily.   But it has to drive change if you are not going forward you are going backwards.

 

So what weight does it have, It will only take these 5 clubs to use a breakaway as a serious threat but you don’t get you bluff called and don’t go through with it, so there has to be a product in place and a deal that is better than what we currently have.  If the OF don’t comply and use their weight do shoot it down, then we must call their bluff, as they are not wanted anywhere else.  The clubs with Paisley Syndrome who rely on the Of pound have to made to choose stich with what you have or join a breakaway 18 team league and stand on your own 2 feet, or better still either die or find your own level

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...