I guess Arsenal and United are going to be out of the EL.

JJxvi said:

---

Kampfers said:

---

JJxvi said:

---

Kampfers said:

---

https://streamable.com/wvbfog

Video is sparse on details but strong in message. Some discussion elsewhere that this could mean the "Big 6" clubs lose the right to sign foreign players on work permits. Maybe even a complete overhaul of the ownership structure that implements a British version of the German 50+1 rule.

Hopefully they do what is necessary to kill this before it takes flight.

---

Do they really have a legal system that would allow one work permit policy for one set of entities and a different one for another group doing the same thing?

---

My best guess is possibly, they don't have the same principle of judicial review that we do and by and large what parliament says is constitutional.

Reality is that I'm not a scholar of British law and so I don't know.

---

I think its likely to be a pretty sticky situation to do that. Its not like the FA has some exclusive right to arbitrarily decided football things within the boundaries of the UK. There are also 3 other associations in the country. What stops the big 6 from leaving the FA altogether. If the Home Office can then decided that the 6 unaffiliated clubs should be punished through the work permit systems, how can they do that and decide that these 6 clubs should arbitrarily be treated differently than clubs that are members of the FA, Scottish FA, Welsh FA, etc.

---

I think where it'd come into play is in the practice of loaning players out to earn work permits (which is supposedly going to become a bigger thing post-Brexit). If the leagues around Europe ban Super League players, then the only other clubs who a Super League team could loan their players out to would be other SL teams... which will be far less likely to occur for a variety of reasons.

Man that would suck arse. Let them finish this one at least.

I keep seeing them wanting to ban the players, but haven't heard many current players comment. Perhaps they aren't allowed or are scared too, but they seem to be stuck in a ****ty situation.

I mean lets take Captain America. You have a contract and then all of a sudden you are being threatened with all this for something you had absolutely zero vote in. Seems unfair. Will all these players be allowed to just walk away from their contracts if they want to? Although I doubt many do. They just want money and to play against the best in the world.

How UEFA manages its relationship with the players at those clubs is going to be tough. They don't want to piss the players off and push them to the side of the clubs, but at the same time, if they make the players feel harm in a way the players push back against their clubs, that's a big help to UEFA.

I'm sure UEFA knows that in this day and age, players at the big clubs are mercenaries and don't really give a **** about the long term situations at their club---thus, they're hoping players will get angry at their club first and foremost for putting them in a tough situation.

FC Augsburg 1907!

Relevant...there would be nothing compelling this league to release players for international duty.

Just give the players what the NCAA just approved. A one-time free transfer to any club they want

I would be really concerned if both UEFA and FIFA were supportive. I'm assuming the next phase of the negotiations will be to determine what their cut will be. I'm sure there's an amount that will change their tune. Even if there are CL reforms I'm sure they'll be more geared towards these big clubs than any other clubs. The first shot has been fired and it won't be the last.

An Ag in CO said:

---

I would be really concerned if both UEFA and FIFA were supportive. I'm assuming the next phase of the negotiations will be to determine what their cut will be. I'm sure there's an amount that will change their tune. Even if there are CL reforms I'm sure they'll be more geared towards these big clubs than any other clubs. The first shot has been fired and it won't be the last.

---

I don't think this is just about the business angle. From a money perspective there is enough to buy off FIFA and UEFA.

The problem for the whole project is that there will be a huge political blowback across party lines with a vast majority of European citizens and politicians against this. And most European countries and clubs are going to be out in the cold.

It will be interesting to watch how this plays out politically.

Quote:

---

The only reason the Super League has come to fruition is because the current system is already broken. The power FIFA, UEFA and the national governing bodies like the FA have over the professional leagues is driving this. It's clear the clubs are trying to adopt an NFL style model where the clubs own the competition thereby determining where the revenue goes.

If you read the information that was leaked a few months back about the Man U/Liverpool led drive to reform the English league system, a huge part of their motivation was that the teams at the top pay all the bills and they have very little say in what the league and FA do with the money. That same issue is what ultimately led to the creation of the EPL to begin with.

---

The Premier League is owned by the clubs and the revenue is shared according to a plan the teams get together a vote on every few years. Revenue for the big clubs has soared in recent years and uneven revenue distribution in England gives the teams at the top an advantage to make the UEFA tournaments, which come with its own riches. I don't really buy there is any injustice going on with regards to the likes of Liverpool or Man U at the various levels of European football.

Hell, not that long ago, a bunch of teams and leagues were complaining how Champions and Europa League money should be distributed more evenly among the competitors.

I do no understand why teams that are used to being at the top league standings are willing to risk being also-rans to bottom feeders of this new league. Will Real Madrid and ManU fans be willing to see their team be in the 6-8th spot year after year?

Also will the top players be floating between the same teams? Its always interesting to see the best players go from league to league. Sometimes they'd succeed because their game matches that leagues style of play, and vice ersa sometimes they'd fail becuase becuase it's not a good fit.

As a player would you rather sit on the bench of a lower level SPL team guaranteed to 'stay-up' or start every game for a team trying to win its domestic league title?

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Quote:

---

The only reason the Super League has come to fruition is because the current system is already broken. The power FIFA, UEFA and the national governing bodies like the FA have over the professional leagues is driving this. It's clear the clubs are trying to adopt an NFL style model where the clubs own the competition thereby determining where the revenue goes.

If you read the information that was leaked a few months back about the Man U/Liverpool led drive to reform the English league system, a huge part of their motivation was that the teams at the top pay all the bills and they have very little say in what the league and FA do with the money. That same issue is what ultimately led to the creation of the EPL to begin with.

---

The Premier League is owned by the clubs and the revenue is shared according to a plan the teams get together a vote on every few years. I don't really buy there is any injustice going on at the various levels of European football.

Hell, not that long ago, a bunch of teams and leagues were complaining how Champions and Europa League money should be distributed more evenly among the competitors.

---

This is right, the Premier League was created in the early 90s to benefit the big clubs and undermine the power of the FA. There is a great background article on this from the London Review of Books that I'll try to dig up.

The irony is that the big clubs killed off the competition, then use that as a reason to form a new league.

JJxvi said:

---

Like I said earlier, the domestic leagues actually banning these teams just makes the inevitable happen faster. They will just immediately create a 40 game single competition table with the best 20 teams they can to fill out the remainder of the slots and that now becomes the best "domestic league" in Europe and since they were all kicked out they can feel pretty much totally justified in saying "well **** you I guess" to the rest of the clubs rather than have any kind of qualification or relegation at all.

---

I am kinda curious so far who the remaining 8 will be. Every single rumored team has come out and declined invitation. The only one I've seen that semi-acknowledged it was Galatasaray in Turkey who said they'd do what was in best interest of the club.

What happened when the initial 12 end up stuck on 12

Random thought-

How is China $$ influencing this decision?

agdoc2001 said:

---

tysker said:

---

I do no understand why teams that are used to being at the top league standings are willing to risk being also-rans to bottom feeders of this new league. Will Real Madrid and ManU fans be willing to see their team be in the 6-8th spot year after year?

---

The mistake that you're making is believing that this decision has anything to do with the fans, players, managers, or even board members. This decision is being carried by the owners and is strictly financial. In the end, the owners could not care less about trophies. When an owner purchases a football team, there is a risk that that the team will decline and lose significant value. As long as the football leagues are a meritocracy, financial success is not an absolute guarantee. The owners want to eliminate any risk from their investments.

---

But that means money will have to be guaranteed. I think owners, fans and players still care about trophies. Ownership is about ego as much as it about money. Yes the $ comes first, but the cups still drive the players and coaches through the entirety of a season. After five or ten years what fans are going to watch lower level teams of overpaid players playing for a draw and basically not to get injured in the final month of the season? If you're a top player, would you want to travel and take the risk? I dont know the economics but how many fans are buying those tix and jerseys?

I don't know. Guys are still signing up to play in the NFL/MLB even knowing it's a foregone conclusion most years that they aren't going to win ***** Cashing huge paychecks is pretty enticing.

ChipFTAC01 said:

---

I don't know. Guys are still signing up to play in the NFL/MLB even knowing it's a foregone conclusion most years that they aren't going to win ***** Cashing huge paychecks is pretty enticing.

---

Ya that is very true. But attendance for those middling to lower teams is pretty poor. Guys will play but will the fans show? I guess corporations will still buy season tickets to watch the 'other guys.' Arsenal fans will be the equivalent of the Wizards or Mets fans...

joemeister said:

---

The only reason the Super League has come to fruition is because the current system is already broken. The power FIFA, UEFA and the national governing bodies like the FA have over the professional leagues is driving this. It's clear the clubs are trying to adopt an NFL style model where the clubs own the competition thereby determining where the revenue goes.

If you read the information that was leaked a few months back about the Man U/Liverpool led drive to reform the English league system, a huge part of their motivation was that the teams at the top pay all the bills and they have very little say in what the league and FA do with the money. That same issue is what ultimately led to the creation of the EPL to begin with.

FIFA and UEFA don't have the will to solve the major problems plaguing the sport at the moment. The fact is, the TV contracts follow the players, the players will follow the money. If this new Super League has negotiated the kind of payouts they are claiming, there is nothing FIFA and UEFA can do about it. A World Cup or a Euro competition without the best players will be a disaster and give the clubs even more power.

---

Yes and no. The subject teams could instead be trying to force that within their own domestic leagues, but they are not. They may be trying to have an NFL model where the clubs own the competition but they are not revenue sharing in their domestic leagues now, I can only assume that they have agreed up front that all TV and ticket $$ revenue will be shared equally among the SL teams, if not it will not work.

Super League can survive and thrive on it's own, to be sure. It does not have to be FIFA sanctioned, or UEFA sanctioned, it can be it's own league, with it's own rules, own by-laws, own competition formats, etc., etc. But there will be no relegation to or promotion from the FIFA/UEFA domestic leagues, they will not be able to play in their domestic leagues and probably not even allowed to participate in the domestic Cup competitions, none of that is ever going to happen, period.

The SL would need it to be 100% separate from the domestic leagues and a stand-alone entity with no cross-over whatsoever (other than player movement). That is where it gets interesting. If there are 14 teams that is only 26 games, if there are 15 teams that is 28 games, all the way up to if there are 20 teams that is 38 games. Then they could add their own cup competition. I think 20 is too high as German and French clubs have already vetoed, and none of the teams not on the original list would make the cut, it's not like the SL is going to turn around and invite Everton / West Ham / Genoa / Getafe / Real Betis, etc., etc. So let's say there are 16 teams, that is a 30 game regular season, plus 15 Cup games, for a total of 45 games. Is that enough to generate the type of revenue these players and clubs are going to try to command?

I agree with you. I think keeping the domestic competition is an important component to the viability of a Super League. Unfortunately, the domestic competitions and the Champions/Europa Leagues are already too integrally tied. The reality is, replacing the Champions League with a new competition between guaranteed teams will water down the domestic competition by removing the significant money source from league placing.

Who cares about attendance. A couple of *******s bought my Rangers from Tom Hicks for $500MM and it looks like they've run it into the ****ter and are gonna sell it for a whole hell of a lot more than that after bulking the City of Arlington for a new stadium.

I got this book for Christmas and would recommend it:
https://www.amazon.com/Club-English-Premier-Wildest-Disruptive/dp/1328506452

It's the history of the Premier League from a business/club side. The answers to all question are, as always, money, but the three main points that changed the game for Premier League were:

1. TV Money - can't stress this enough. The realization of what they had and the HUGE jump in TV money started it all.

2. Marketing - Man U's marketing revolution, establishing those new revenue streams, and the blue print it laid out for other clubs

3. Foreign Money - #1 and #2 and the huge jump in money opened up foreign eyes to the prospect of teams as an investment and that really took it to the stratosphere, because money became no object.

Now this is pretty funny

From Spanish twitter source

Quote:

---

The Super League clubs have decided to transfer their UCL trophies over to the Super League. Real Madrid will start with 13 Super League championships.

---

Jarrin' Jay said:

---

joemeister said:

---

The only reason the Super League has come to fruition is because the current system is already broken. The power FIFA, UEFA and the national governing bodies like the FA have over the professional leagues is driving this. It's clear the clubs are trying to adopt an NFL style model where the clubs own the competition thereby determining where the revenue goes.

If you read the information that was leaked a few months back about the Man U/Liverpool led drive to reform the English league system, a huge part of their motivation was that the teams at the top pay all the bills and they have very little say in what the league and FA do with the money. That same issue is what ultimately led to the creation of the EPL to begin with.

FIFA and UEFA don't have the will to solve the major problems plaguing the sport at the moment. The fact is, the TV contracts follow the players, the players will follow the money. If this new Super League has negotiated the kind of payouts they are claiming, there is nothing FIFA and UEFA can do about it. A World Cup or a Euro competition without the best players will be a disaster and give the clubs even more power.

---

Yes and no. The subject teams could instead be trying to force that within their own domestic leagues, but they are not. They may be trying to have an NFL model where the clubs own the competition but they are not revenue sharing in their domestic leagues now, I can only assume that they have agreed up front that all TV and ticket $$ revenue will be shared equally among the SL teams, if not it will not work.

Super League can survive and thrive on it's own, to be sure. It does not have to be FIFA sanctioned, or UEFA sanctioned, it can be it's own league, with it's own rules, own by-laws, own competition formats, etc., etc. But there will be no relegation to or promotion from the FIFA/UEFA domestic leagues, they will not be able to play in their domestic leagues and probably not even allowed to participate in the domestic Cup competitions, none of that is ever going to happen, period.

The SL would need it to be 100% separate from the domestic leagues and a stand-alone entity with no cross-over whatsoever (other than player movement). That is where it gets interesting. If there are 14 teams that is only 26 games, if there are 15 teams that is 28 games, all the way up to if there are 20 teams that is 38 games. Then they could add their own cup competition. I think 20 is too high as German and French clubs have already vetoed, and none of the teams not on the original list would make the cut, it's not like the SL is going to turn around and invite Everton / West Ham / Genoa / Getafe / Real Betis, etc., etc. So let's say there are 16 teams, that is a 30 game regular season, plus 15 Cup games, for a total of 45 games. Is that enough to generate the type of revenue these players and clubs are going to try to command?

---

100% agree with this. And it's why the threat of expulsion from FIFA sanctioned leagues could actually work.

I agree to an extent with those saying expulsion from domestic leagues would only hasten something that's inevitably going to come regardless. But by doing it in one fell swoop now, you don't allow the environment to slowly become accustomed to the new normal. In 3 years time, there's a pretty high likelihood that a lot of people will have become begrudgingly accepting of a Super League. Heck, that could happen in 3 months time. But if leagues were to take the stance now that says "GTFO...do not pass go, do not collect $200" it precipitates the necessity for the Super League to be created now because the clubs literally have nothing to play for/in. In an environment that will likely never be more hostile to the idea of a Super League than now.

Or to put it another way, does anyone think that a first Super League game scheduled for August 15th, 2021 would be well received by the global soccer market? Isn't it highly likely that the game would be more successful if it started August 15, 2024?

If you assume that the point of no return has been crossed (it may not have been but then again...it may have been) and that these 12 clubs are hell bent on doing this, domestic leagues, especially the EPL, are left with two choices:

1) Watch their revenues inevitably slowly shrink to mere fractions of their current value. Keeping the SL teams in domestic leagues is still a massive negative due to fans being turned off by them and clubs inevitably devaluing the competition with 2nd string players.

2) Gamble and try to flip power out of the clubs hands. Sure, it might not work but in the long run, they likely don't lose much. And the leagues might actually gain a whole lot. And if reports are true and that this effort is really being led by American owners and Real Madrid...that the others are just using this as a ploy to negotiate more power within the Champions League construct...then I think it's likely that the Barca's and Juve's of the world roll over pretty quickly and stop their posturing.

The logistics of starting a non-FIFA, non-UEFA sanctioned league on short notice would be enormous and the affects on the club and its players (unfortunately) massive. Sure there would likely be weeks/months/years of litigation while the expulsion played out but...I don't think the status quo would be possible while the court cases ran their course. It would be catastrophic for the clubs and create a greater likelihood of any non-FIFA, non-UEFA sanctioned league that was cobbled together on short notice of failing.

Of course it always has been and always will be about the $$$.

As a Bayern fan, if the SL goes and is viable, I would like to see them in it, but will follow the club and cheer for them in the Bundesliga and in the watered down UEFA competitions regardless. Then again Bayern operates with a different mindset than most other big clubs. Alaba has gotten too big for his britches and Bayern will not meet his wage "demands" and will let him transfer or walk. No player is bigger than the club. What Pogba is trying to pull at Man U, Bayern would publicly tell him to shut up and dribble.

Anyway, I don't have a dog in the fight and will continue to follow Bayern and West Ham as my #2 Euro team. Hell I think the best football matches of the season are watching the scrappers in the last month of the clubs fighting relegation, especially if it is a game between 2 teams both in the bottom 5.

SL can go it alone, but the idea of 15 teams plus 5 more invited, that is just NOT going to work. They have 12 teams now, they need to find their 4-8 more to build their league. NONE of the domestic associations are going to allow, for example, West Ham to go play a season in the SL as an invited team and then come back to the domestic EPL after a season. That will absolutely never, ever happen.

The SL needs to build out their roster of teams, break away, have their own league, own cup, own TV rights, etc. and they can make a go of it, be successful, take $$ away from the domestic leagues, diminish the importance of the domestic leagues and UEFA CL, etc., as an independent league, absolutely nothing stopping them as private business from doing that. But their mistake was counting on ANY cooperating and coordination with the domestic leagues and cup competitions. Those are already off the table.

Jim01 said:

---

I got this book for Christmas and would recommend it:
https://www.amazon.com/Club-English-Premier-Wildest-Disruptive/dp/1328506452

It's the history of the Premier League from a business/club side. The answers to all question are, as always, money, but the three main points that changed the game for Premier League were:

1. TV Money - can't stress this enough. The realization of what they had and the HUGE jump in TV money started it all.

2. Marketing - Man U's marketing revolution, establishing those new revenue streams, and the blue print it laid out for other clubs

3. Foreign Money - #1 and #2 and the huge jump in money opened up foreign eyes to the prospect of teams as an investment and that really took it to the stratosphere, because money became no object.

---

Yes, of course it's always has been and will continue to be about the $$. 100% accurate as to the "global" branding, marketing and reach for revenue streams, there is a reason they come to the U.S. or China, etc. for pre-season games / tours.

When the EPL and Bundesliga negotiated their last U.S. TV rights that is truly when they learned the demand for their product and revenue they could command, as even domestically at that time the distribution and revenue streams were not yet anything remotely like the NFL here in the U.S. I don't know how it is in England now, but it used to be just one match on SkySports1 on Saturday and one on Sunday. When I was in London about 10-12 years ago and went to a Fulham or Chelsea game or was in a pub to watch other games, they were always stunned beyond belief when I told them every weekend I could watch EVERY EPL game at my home in Dallas, Texas and further I could watch EVERY UEFA CL game.

wangus12 said:

---

JJxvi said:

---

Like I said earlier, the domestic leagues actually banning these teams just makes the inevitable happen faster. They will just immediately create a 40 game single competition table with the best 20 teams they can to fill out the remainder of the slots and that now becomes the best "domestic league" in Europe and since they were all kicked out they can feel pretty much totally justified in saying "well **** you I guess" to the rest of the clubs rather than have any kind of qualification or relegation at all.

---

I am kinda curious so far who the remaining 8 will be. Every single rumored team has come out and declined invitation. The only one I've seen that semi-acknowledged it was Galatasaray in Turkey who said they'd do what was in best interest of the club.

What happened when the initial 12 end up stuck on 12

---

It will be the same rumored teams that declined the invitation. They might prefer keeping the domestic leagues with a revamped Champions League (or just don't want to take the lions share of the blamed in this), but they also aren't going to put themselves in a position to get left behind. If it becomes clear to them the Super League is going to work, PSG, Bayern, etc. will join up. They will also then be able to sell this to their fan/politicians that while this wasn't what they really wanted and they really liked the old system, they have to join up to ensure German/French teams aren't left behind.

This league will either fail before games actually occur or those teams that currently declined will join it.

I dont know if english fans will ever forgive their teams should they proceed. Ive already had one lifetime arsenal fan say he was moving on.


The reason being that these teams are an organic part of their city, typically started by the common local people long ago. The teams are part of the fabric of the identity of these people and cities. To have foreign owners chase money and disrupt said fabric is going to be unforgivable.

I wouldn't be surprised to see alternates pop up.