|
Post by willieeetmiout on Sept 15, 2022 6:39:23 GMT
Agree with Bayern, don't quite get the howls of outrage about it. It might turn out to be a completely shit idea but it seems absolutely harmless. And the outrage seems to be because heâs American and people donât like change. Not much in football needs changing but Iâve always thought the Charity Shield should be binned. Replacing it with this seems like a good suggestion. The relegation thing I donât like but itâs not like they donât do it on other football leagues. You finish third bottom in the Bundesliga and you play a team from Bundesliga 2 in a play off. It seems to work there. Would I want that here? Not really but itâs not a terrible idea that comes from just being a Yank. What do you mean it 'seems to work there'? On what level? I know little about Bundesliga but I can guarantee the financial gap between 3rd bottom and a 2 team is miniscule compared to what it is here. Not forgetting you toil for 46 league games, enter the Cup games earlier and are then faced with a one off game against a team who has played less games and has a budget 10x yours that season. It's a shit idea. Simple. The All stars game is also a shit idea. American sports doesn't generally allow a monopoly on success like ours does. A shit team in American can one day be winners. The draft system allows all teams to have "all Star" players. There were 80(?) All stars players named this year. Here it would just be Man City and Liverpool players against Chelsea, Tottenham and Arsenal players.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 15, 2022 7:38:54 GMT
NFL is pretty big over here so thatâs crap for a start. Itâd be a one off game and replacing the charity shield would make sense. Internationals arenât really all star either. NFL has no comparable league to compete with, so itâs not crap. American football doesnât exist at a high level outside of the US. So they have âall-starâ games, because they have no one else to play with. It gets watched by some people in other countries because it is made for tv. Going to the games can be damn boring depending on how many timeouts etc the team will run down. To stop a sporting event for a tv break every 2 minutes is about as boring to see live as you could imagine. You said only Americans care. Which is crap.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Sept 15, 2022 9:09:27 GMT
Itâd be crap, just like the majority of âbig gamesâ, where two teams often just cancel each other out and neither go for the jugular. Imagine the anger fans would have if your best player got injured because they went in for a 50-50. The big games tend to be good I think. Whatâs the difference if it happened in a friendly or the charity shield? It happens. As a replacement for the charity shield I think itâd be interesting. And if done inventively could get more younger fans into the game as you could make it like FIFA and give them a bit of involvement with selections of squads. This is a nightmare vision of the future. A world run by people with no actual qualifications or experience making decisions they aren't competent to make and believing they have a god given right to make them. Personally I can't wait for Celebrity Brain Surgery Challenge where a group of C list celebs get to re-arrange some unfortunate bastards cerebellum with viewers getting an online vote on whether to sever the pineal gland or simply chop out a bit of the frontal cortex and hope for the best. The accompanying message board will be chock full of brain surgery aficionados berating the Royal College of Surgeons as a bunch of no nothing so called "experts" who should just step aside and let the people decide. As to the "all star" challenge - it would be as crap as any other meaningless preseason friendly and made worse by showcasing players from the "Big Six" and one or two from the "lesser" clubs there to be tapped up at half time.
|
|
|
Post by The Stubborn Optimist on Sept 15, 2022 9:19:30 GMT
The big games tend to be good I think. Whatâs the difference if it happened in a friendly or the charity shield? It happens. As a replacement for the charity shield I think itâd be interesting. And if done inventively could get more younger fans into the game as you could make it like FIFA and give them a bit of involvement with selections of squads. This is a nightmare vision of the future. A world run by people with no actual qualifications or experience making decisions they aren't competent to make and believing they have a god given right to make them. Personally I can't wait for Celebrity Brain Surgery Challenge where a group of C list celebs get to re-arrange some unfortunate bastards cerebellum with viewers getting an online vote on whether to sever the pineal gland or simply chop out a bit of the frontal cortex and hope for the best. The accompanying message board will be chock full of brain surgery aficionados berating the Royal College of Surgeons as a bunch of no nothing so called "experts" who should just step aside and let the people decide. As to the "all star" challenge - it would be as crap as any other meaningless preseason friendly and made worse by showcasing players from the "Big Six" and one or two from the "lesser" clubs there to be tapped up at half time. I think we're already there.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 15, 2022 9:36:11 GMT
The big games tend to be good I think. Whatâs the difference if it happened in a friendly or the charity shield? It happens. As a replacement for the charity shield I think itâd be interesting. And if done inventively could get more younger fans into the game as you could make it like FIFA and give them a bit of involvement with selections of squads. This is a nightmare vision of the future. A world run by people with no actual qualifications or experience making decisions they aren't competent to make and believing they have a god given right to make them. Personally I can't wait for Celebrity Brain Surgery Challenge where a group of C list celebs get to re-arrange some unfortunate bastards cerebellum with viewers getting an online vote on whether to sever the pineal gland or simply chop out a bit of the frontal cortex and hope for the best. The accompanying message board will be chock full of brain surgery aficionados berating the Royal College of Surgeons as a bunch of no nothing so called "experts" who should just step aside and let the people decide. As to the "all star" challenge - it would be as crap as any other meaningless preseason friendly and made worse by showcasing players from the "Big Six" and one or two from the "lesser" clubs there to be tapped up at half time. Why is getting a new generation involved a nightmare? Itâs one game that you could actually be pretty inventive with and give kids something to enjoy bar hoping itâs a good game and they wonât get bored.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 15, 2022 9:40:23 GMT
This is a nightmare vision of the future. A world run by people with no actual qualifications or experience making decisions they aren't competent to make and believing they have a god given right to make them. Personally I can't wait for Celebrity Brain Surgery Challenge where a group of C list celebs get to re-arrange some unfortunate bastards cerebellum with viewers getting an online vote on whether to sever the pineal gland or simply chop out a bit of the frontal cortex and hope for the best. The accompanying message board will be chock full of brain surgery aficionados berating the Royal College of Surgeons as a bunch of no nothing so called "experts" who should just step aside and let the people decide. As to the "all star" challenge - it would be as crap as any other meaningless preseason friendly and made worse by showcasing players from the "Big Six" and one or two from the "lesser" clubs there to be tapped up at half time. I think we're already there. Does it really matter with football? Itâs entertainment. And the younger generation want to be more involved. They want easy access and they want it for free generally. Or they wonât watch it. Football has an issue with getting younger fans. They can turn esports on at any time on YouTube. It is an issue. Having a novelty game isnât such a bad idea is it? And one where fans can actually get involved too? Itâs not like itâs a referendum on how to run the country. Itâs a poxy game of football.
|
|
|
Post by The Stubborn Optimist on Sept 15, 2022 9:47:16 GMT
I think we're already there. Does it really matter with football? Itâs entertainment. And the younger generation want to be more involved. They want easy access and they want it for free generally. Or they wonât watch it. Football has an issue with getting younger fans. They can turn esports on at any time on YouTube. It is an issue. Having a novelty game isnât such a bad idea is it? And one where fans can actually get involved too? Itâs not like itâs a referendum on how to run the country. Itâs a poxy game of football. My apologies but I wasn't referring to football specifically in this instance, more to the world and life in general.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 15, 2022 9:55:25 GMT
Does it really matter with football? Itâs entertainment. And the younger generation want to be more involved. They want easy access and they want it for free generally. Or they wonât watch it. Football has an issue with getting younger fans. They can turn esports on at any time on YouTube. It is an issue. Having a novelty game isnât such a bad idea is it? And one where fans can actually get involved too? Itâs not like itâs a referendum on how to run the country. Itâs a poxy game of football. My apologies but I wasn't referring to football specifically in this instance, more to the world and life in general. Oh I know hence my nod to a referendum. And I think thatâs what the above poster is missing imo. Itâs just a game of football. Who cares if an expert isnât doing something for one game? đ
|
|
|
Post by BuzzB on Sept 15, 2022 10:25:53 GMT
Just been a soundbite on Talksport, Souness reckons from his source that this dude is interfering in team issues, partly the reason that Tuchel has gone apparently.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Sept 15, 2022 11:40:10 GMT
My apologies but I wasn't referring to football specifically in this instance, more to the world and life in general. Oh I know hence my nod to a referendum. And I think thatâs what the above poster is missing imo. Itâs just a game of football. Who cares if an expert isnât doing something for one game? đ My main concern is that it helps reinforce the creeping perception that the online/media world is more real than the real world. If you want kids to actually understand how football works engage them in the messy reality of a local club - not encourage them to engage in some superficial media led puff piece for the "big six". I also have issues about the idea that football is primarily there to entertain the supporters - it's back to front. Football clubs formed to support and enable people who want to play a competitive sport. The supporters came along because they enjoyed watching people play competitive sport. The idea that the primary purpose of a football club is to entertain the supporters is a relatively recent phenomena and what you are suggesting (supporters picking the teams) is an extension of that development. Its making passively watching something and putting in no effort to actually do something above the hard graft involved in actually being good at something. It's a terrible idea for a learning experience for a generation getting less and less engaged in the real world.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Sept 15, 2022 11:51:52 GMT
This is a nightmare vision of the future. A world run by people with no actual qualifications or experience making decisions they aren't competent to make and believing they have a god given right to make them. Personally I can't wait for Celebrity Brain Surgery Challenge where a group of C list celebs get to re-arrange some unfortunate bastards cerebellum with viewers getting an online vote on whether to sever the pineal gland or simply chop out a bit of the frontal cortex and hope for the best. The accompanying message board will be chock full of brain surgery aficionados berating the Royal College of Surgeons as a bunch of no nothing so called "experts" who should just step aside and let the people decide. As to the "all star" challenge - it would be as crap as any other meaningless preseason friendly and made worse by showcasing players from the "Big Six" and one or two from the "lesser" clubs there to be tapped up at half time. Why is getting a new generation involved a nightmare? Itâs one game that you could actually be pretty inventive with and give kids something to enjoy bar hoping itâs a good game and they wonât get bored. I don't know about this particular idea but I do think football should keep an open mind. Imagine if cricket authorities just said everything with this game is fine and dandy no need for thinking outside the box or new ideas. There'd be no limited overs cricket, no 20/20, no Hundred, no IPL. The purists hate it but it's reinvigorated the game got millions of people including the young more interested and it's producing shit tons of money. Apart from some stuffy attitude who wouldn't think it was a good thing for the sport.
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Sept 15, 2022 11:56:36 GMT
Why is getting a new generation involved a nightmare? Itâs one game that you could actually be pretty inventive with and give kids something to enjoy bar hoping itâs a good game and they wonât get bored. I don't know about this particular idea but I do think football should keep an open mind. Imagine if cricket authorities just said everything with this game is fine and dandy no need for thinking outside the box or new ideas. There'd be no limited overs cricket, no 20/20, no Hundred, no IPL. The purists hate it but it's reinvigorated the game got millions of people including the young more interested and it's producing shit tons of money. Apart from some stuffy attitude who wouldn't think it was a good thing for the sport. I just donât think that this is the way forward to be honest. If anything, less football would add to the spectacle, not more. I donât see how an Exhibition game played at half speed will garner more interest than a club friendly. For the casual observer, it would probably serve as justification not to bother. Surely, the best way to create consistent support is for the fans to fall in love with a club, not a player. The clubs can always do more to improve fan engagement.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Sept 15, 2022 11:58:55 GMT
Oh I know hence my nod to a referendum. And I think thatâs what the above poster is missing imo. Itâs just a game of football. Who cares if an expert isnât doing something for one game? đ My main concern is that it helps reinforce the creeping perception that the online/media world is more real than the real world. If you want kids to actually understand how football works engage them in the messy reality of a local club - not encourage them to engage in some superficial media led puff piece for the "big six". I also have issues about the idea that football is primarily there to entertain the supporters - it's back to front. Football clubs formed to support and enable people who want to play a competitive sport. The supporters came along because they enjoyed watching people play competitive sport. The idea that the primary purpose of a football club is to entertain the supporters is a relatively recent phenomena and what you are suggesting (supporters picking the teams) is an extension of that development. Its making passively watching something and putting in no effort to actually do something above the hard graft involved in actually being good at something. It's a terrible idea for a learning experience for a generation getting less and less engaged in the real world. Football clubs had a choice in this, they chose the money therefore have a duty to attempt to provide entertainment. It's an entertainment product. I really don't think that attitude of yours engages people at all they are engaged in the real world it's you that is rejecting it in favour of some form of nostalgia.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Sept 15, 2022 12:03:57 GMT
Why is getting a new generation involved a nightmare? Itâs one game that you could actually be pretty inventive with and give kids something to enjoy bar hoping itâs a good game and they wonât get bored. I don't know about this particular idea but I do think football should keep an open mind. Imagine if cricket authorities just said everything with this game is fine and dandy no need for thinking outside the box or new ideas. There'd be no limited overs cricket, no 20/20, no Hundred, no IPL. The purists hate it but it's reinvigorated the game got millions of people including the young more interested and it's producing shit tons of money. Apart from some stuffy attitude who wouldn't think it was a good thing for the sport. That isn't a relevant analogy. Kids aren't being asked to pick the sides in the Hundred, IPL or 202/20 and in all those versions of the game kids are encouraged to go to games and get to actually play the game in gaps in play. My issue is with the idea of treating football like some sort of video game and getting involved being an exercise for couch potatoes. It's the lack of engagement in the real world that I have issues with not new ideas for getting kids involved in sport. In terms of cricket those new ideas are effectively creating 2 different sports - limited overs and multi day cricket. It is splitting in the same way as Rugby League and Rugby Union are 2 different sports. Given time the European Supper League could have taken football down the same path - proper football and VARball.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Sept 15, 2022 12:07:03 GMT
I don't know about this particular idea but I do think football should keep an open mind. Imagine if cricket authorities just said everything with this game is fine and dandy no need for thinking outside the box or new ideas. There'd be no limited overs cricket, no 20/20, no Hundred, no IPL. The purists hate it but it's reinvigorated the game got millions of people including the young more interested and it's producing shit tons of money. Apart from some stuffy attitude who wouldn't think it was a good thing for the sport. I just donât think that this is the way forward to be honest. If anything, less football would add to the spectacle, not more. I donât see how an Exhibition game played at half speed will garner more interest than a club friendly. For the casual observer, it would probably serve as justification not to bother. Surely, the best way to create consistent support is for the fans to fall in love with a club, not a player. The clubs can always do more to improve fan engagement. I did say I wasn't overly enthusiastic about the particular idea. If anything I'd like to see something more drastic to the format of the game. Things to do with clamping down on time wasting and speeding up the flow of the game would be welcome. Possibly bonus points for scoring say 4 or more goals, a penalty shoot out at the end of a draw for the extra point. Basically I don't think you should ever be totally satisfied with the product and close your mind to things that might make it better and more attractive to the punters.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Sept 15, 2022 12:14:30 GMT
I don't know about this particular idea but I do think football should keep an open mind. Imagine if cricket authorities just said everything with this game is fine and dandy no need for thinking outside the box or new ideas. There'd be no limited overs cricket, no 20/20, no Hundred, no IPL. The purists hate it but it's reinvigorated the game got millions of people including the young more interested and it's producing shit tons of money. Apart from some stuffy attitude who wouldn't think it was a good thing for the sport. That isn't a relevant analogy. Kids aren't being asked to pick the sides in the Hundred, IPL or 202/20 and in all those versions of the game kids are encouraged to go to games and get to actually play the game in gaps in play. My issue is with the idea of treating football like some sort of video game and getting involved being an exercise for couch potatoes. It's the lack of engagement in the real world that I have issues with not new ideas for getting kids involved in sport. In terms of cricket those new ideas are effectively creating 2 different sports - limited overs and multi day cricket. It is splitting in the same way as Rugby League and Rugby Union are 2 different sports. Given time the European Supper League could have taken football down the same path - proper football and VARball.I'm not entirely sure what that means but it seems pretty anti VAR and as per usual I hold the polar opposite view. VAR and it's operation could be improved but the bottom line is it's essential when in games of football hundreds of millions of pounds are at stake imo it should be compulsory in the top 2 divisions. I'd accept that an undesirable consequence is that it interupts the flow of the game and would mitigate that by taking firmer action against players judged to be deliberately interupting the flow of the game espescially goalkeepers.
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Sept 15, 2022 12:35:14 GMT
Iâm thinking T-Shirt cannons, fancam, 32oz cups of full fat cola and LOTS of fireworks. Letâs Americanise the shit out of it.
Yee-haw.
|
|
|
Post by a on Sept 15, 2022 13:03:22 GMT
I think we're already there. Does it really matter with football? Itâs entertainment. And the younger generation want to be more involved. They want easy access and they want it for free generally. Or they wonât watch it. Football has an issue with getting younger fans. They can turn esports on at any time on YouTube. It is an issue. Having a novelty game isnât such a bad idea is it? And one where fans can actually get involved too? Itâs not like itâs a referendum on how to run the country. Itâs a poxy game of football. Donât see how it gets kids more involved than any other game, charity shield for example. Making it a gimmick is hardly going to drastically change that imo. It wonât happen anyway so itâs moot đ
|
|
|
Post by marylandstoke on Sept 15, 2022 13:07:48 GMT
NFL is pretty big over here so thatâs crap for a start. Itâd be a one off game and replacing the charity shield would make sense. Internationals arenât really all star either. NFL has no comparable league to compete with, so itâs not crap. American football doesnât exist at a high level outside of the US. So they have âall-starâ games, because they have no one else to play with. It gets watched by some people in other countries because it is made for tv. Going to the games can be damn boring depending on how many timeouts etc the team will run down. To stop a sporting event for a tv break every 2 minutes is about as boring to see live as you could imagine. Yet Baseball has an all star game thatâs all yank, and thatâs a sport that is huge in other areas of the World?
|
|
|
Post by dirtclod on Sept 15, 2022 13:09:46 GMT
Plus as several have pointed out, so fans vote for the 40 best players to stage an All Star game. (That's the way most of them work over here in the US - to get fans "engaged") OK, so after you get done taking players from the Big 6... it's essentially a scrimmage amongst the Top 6 with a couple of players sprinkled in from other clubs. One of the problems we've had with our all star games is that most fans who vote will continually vote for the "big names" even if they're playing like shit that year or past it. You have cabals of fans who try to coordinate in order to "rig" the voting etc. etc.
Can't see the "marketing potential" of this suddenly causing football to be more popular amongst the younger crowd. Improving match-day experiences such as having sensible access to/from stadiums, better food, good strong free Wifi at the stadium, having standing as well as seating areas. possibly even a dreaded "fan-zone" etc. On the pitch, might try providing decent officiating, eliminate time-wasting and achieve some sort of parity between the PL teams as a start. The problem is, according to my son that his generation "has the attention-span of a fly" anything lasting longer than 30 minutes, they get bored with. So let's say one team jumps into a 2-0 lead by half-time. A significant portion of the crowd is ready to move on to the next "thing." But as he also points out, there's always exceptions and it's those exceptions that you're after - the ones who'll get hooked and attend the entire match, then go home and pick a favorite local team to support and become a total nut like us lot.
Oh and if it's anything like American all star games - good luck affording the tickets to this "spectacle." Try attending the NBA All Star game over here - you have to take a 2nd mortgage to see a meaningless game (Unless you're the players agent) that is mainly a photo-shoot and occasional highlight on Sports Center. The ticket-prices in all these sports have escalated so much that an "average" person can't afford it, so an all star game is a chance to further gouge those who can afford it. As a US citizen, the last thing I want to see is further "Americanization" of the game - look at the mess VAR has created. Will take years to get that sorted out properly.
It's too dangerous for Pottermus, he could shoot his eye out with that T-Shirt cannon.
|
|
|
Post by GrahamHyde on Sept 15, 2022 13:15:00 GMT
The reason why we should keep the charity shield is in the word 'charity'.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 15, 2022 14:38:21 GMT
Oh I know hence my nod to a referendum. And I think thatâs what the above poster is missing imo. Itâs just a game of football. Who cares if an expert isnât doing something for one game? đ My main concern is that it helps reinforce the creeping perception that the online/media world is more real than the real world. If you want kids to actually understand how football works engage them in the messy reality of a local club - not encourage them to engage in some superficial media led puff piece for the "big six". I also have issues about the idea that football is primarily there to entertain the supporters - it's back to front. Football clubs formed to support and enable people who want to play a competitive sport. The supporters came along because they enjoyed watching people play competitive sport. The idea that the primary purpose of a football club is to entertain the supporters is a relatively recent phenomena and what you are suggesting (supporters picking the teams) is an extension of that development. Its making passively watching something and putting in no effort to actually do something above the hard graft involved in actually being good at something. It's a terrible idea for a learning experience for a generation getting less and less engaged in the real world. They donât care and never will. That battle is lost. Social media is the here and now and is massive and that wonât change. People have to get on board with that. Football is entertainment. Whatâs the point else at this leve? You might as well just watch some blokes on a Sunday if it isnât the case. And no itâs not. Itâs exactly what they would want. Putting your thoughts on that isnât how it should work. It doesnât sit in the real world.
|
|
|
Post by a on Sept 15, 2022 18:30:25 GMT
The reason why we should keep the charity shield is in the word 'charity'. Yea good point. The clubs get half I think then rest to charities?
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Sept 18, 2022 11:14:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by toppercorner on Sept 18, 2022 19:36:37 GMT
won't be long until the yanks have voting control of the league... then we'll see what they really have in mind.
|
|
|
Post by toppercorner on Sept 21, 2022 19:04:57 GMT
Didn't take long did it? As obvious as the nose on your face that the yanks want to take the football there. Only 4 more US owners needed in the Prem before they can start to vote their own way. Yes, it says they want to play champions league winners, but it's simply the start. Before you know it, the league will have been decimated and it'll be Chelsea vs Miami played in Shangai, no draws allowed only winners on the day etc... All for the good of the pyramid .... ffs, it's always been all about $$$$$ www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/09/21/super-cup-american-teams-could-face-champions-league-winners/"American teams could take on the Champions League winners with Uefa planning to revamp the Super Cup into a four-club mini tournament.
The idea also raises the prospect of the games being taken out of Europe, as a festival of football, to try to reach a wider global fanbase.
Talks have taken place to replace the current Uefa Super Cup â which is played in a European country between the Champions League and Europa League winners â with matches (two semi-finals and a final) also involving the winners of the new Europa Conference League.
The fourth team would be invited, with the United States, which is considered the key growth market for European football, the main destination under discussion to host the season curtain-raiser event. One option would be to include the host country's champions â in this case, the winners of Major League Soccer â as the fourth team in the competition.
The tournament could then be hosted by another country the following year, with its champions invited, although the US is the main market being considered and the plan is likely to be closely followed by the American owners of Premier League clubs.
Uefa's new English-language US broadcast rights deal for its men's European club competitions represents a 150 per cent improvement on its existing contract, with further revenue still to be generated from the sale of Spanish-language rights.
It is understood there have not been any serious talks at this stage about playing Champions League matches â either group-stage games, knockout matches or the final â outside Europe although this will undoubtedly appeal to a number of clubs.
The idea of a new opening tournament to replace the Super Cup from 2024 is gaining support as a means to drive more revenue, not just for the competing clubs but to European football as a whole, by attracting a new audience, with an emphasis on bringing in more families and female fans.
Other sports have successfully taken matches into new markets, such as the NFL playing regular-season games in London.
Further discussions are set to take place at the European Club Association's (ECA) General Assembly in Istanbul on Thursday and Friday, with the organisation keen to foster a spirit of innovation.
ECA chairman Nasser Al-Khelaifi is expected to issue a warning to clubs about dangerous debt levels in the context of rising interest rates around the continent.
Further talks will also take place over a new financial distribution model for the new-look European tournaments post-2024.
Smaller clubs will be seeking a greater share, while those at the top will also want more, arguing they drive the interest and therefore the revenue.
The European Leagues group has called for major changes to how money is split within and between the competitions, and for a higher percentage to be set aside in solidarity payments to non-competing clubs."
|
|
|
Post by toppercorner on Sept 30, 2022 6:15:53 GMT
The Yanks will be behind this.
If Everton are bought out by a new US investor (as reported), it'll only be 3 American owners away from them having voting control of the PL.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Sept 30, 2022 6:52:18 GMT
The Yanks will be behind this. If Everton are bought out by a new US investor (as reported), it'll only be 3 American owners away from them having voting control of the PL. We had this before A Premier League XI played a Series axXI About 20 years ago?
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Sept 30, 2022 7:41:46 GMT
Didn't take long did it? As obvious as the nose on your face that the yanks want to take the football there. Only 4 more US owners needed in the Prem before they can start to vote their own way. Yes, it says they want to play champions league winners, but it's simply the start. Before you know it, the league will have been decimated and it'll be Chelsea vs Miami played in Shangai, no draws allowed only winners on the day etc... All for the good of the pyramid .... ffs, it's always been all about $$$$$ www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/09/21/super-cup-american-teams-could-face-champions-league-winners/"American teams could take on the Champions League winners with Uefa planning to revamp the Super Cup into a four-club mini tournament.
The idea also raises the prospect of the games being taken out of Europe, as a festival of football, to try to reach a wider global fanbase.
Talks have taken place to replace the current Uefa Super Cup â which is played in a European country between the Champions League and Europa League winners â with matches (two semi-finals and a final) also involving the winners of the new Europa Conference League.
The fourth team would be invited, with the United States, which is considered the key growth market for European football, the main destination under discussion to host the season curtain-raiser event. One option would be to include the host country's champions â in this case, the winners of Major League Soccer â as the fourth team in the competition.
The tournament could then be hosted by another country the following year, with its champions invited, although the US is the main market being considered and the plan is likely to be closely followed by the American owners of Premier League clubs.
Uefa's new English-language US broadcast rights deal for its men's European club competitions represents a 150 per cent improvement on its existing contract, with further revenue still to be generated from the sale of Spanish-language rights.
It is understood there have not been any serious talks at this stage about playing Champions League matches â either group-stage games, knockout matches or the final â outside Europe although this will undoubtedly appeal to a number of clubs.
The idea of a new opening tournament to replace the Super Cup from 2024 is gaining support as a means to drive more revenue, not just for the competing clubs but to European football as a whole, by attracting a new audience, with an emphasis on bringing in more families and female fans.
Other sports have successfully taken matches into new markets, such as the NFL playing regular-season games in London.
Further discussions are set to take place at the European Club Association's (ECA) General Assembly in Istanbul on Thursday and Friday, with the organisation keen to foster a spirit of innovation.
ECA chairman Nasser Al-Khelaifi is expected to issue a warning to clubs about dangerous debt levels in the context of rising interest rates around the continent.
Further talks will also take place over a new financial distribution model for the new-look European tournaments post-2024.
Smaller clubs will be seeking a greater share, while those at the top will also want more, arguing they drive the interest and therefore the revenue.
The European Leagues group has called for major changes to how money is split within and between the competitions, and for a higher percentage to be set aside in solidarity payments to non-competing clubs."â Talks have taken place to replace the current Uefa Super Cup â which is played in a European country between the Champions League and Europa League winners â with matches (two semi-finals and a final) also involving the winners of the new Europa Conference League.â Takes away the whole point of the Super Cup. Itâs not exactly Super when they are playing teams who havenât earned it. Canât wait for the regular season in the PL to end at game 30, whereby season points stop mattering and the top 8 play a few extra games, with the winner then being declared Champions. They could even play the final at the same ground as that yearâs Super Bowl, âto engage more fansâ.
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Sept 30, 2022 7:49:36 GMT
Draft system, anyone?
|
|