European Super League | All six PL teams withdraw from ESL

[Rousseau 10,604]

2 minutes ago, alexscottislegend said:

And here's another thought: if a super league team is relegated (assuming they even allow that) where do they play? They will be a pariah. That should make them think.

The plans are that all these teams still play in their domestic leagues, but they'd be out of European competitions - and they'll not be let back in easily!

 

It's only the 'founding members' that are spared relegation.  

[der Berliner 3,744]

1 hour ago, Rousseau said:

There's supposedly 5 places open in this ESL for new sides, but it's not clear how they qualify - CL winners, Europa League winners?

That would presume that UEFA agrees here or bans said winners for later competitions. We shall see.

[compo 7,035]

it makes me smile when I hear UEFA using the word greed in their description of this new set up a bit rich coming from ab organisation we all know is rife with greed and corruption and the other lot have remained quiet in all this would be interesting to see were Fifa stand on this 

[ian1964 10,723]

[Franc Ergs 1,651]

 

 

[Biblio 148]

It annoys me to see the likes of Gary Neville doing his moral grandstanding bit. This is a man who bought EFL status for Salford City by distorting the playing field in which they were competing against other non-league clubs. How is this proposed ESL any different to what he did, other than in scale? I don't lie the idea of a ESL but part of me would love to see the back of clubs who have showed no concern for the welfare of the sport at all over the last few decades.

[ChelseaBoy 2,441]

4 hours ago, Rousseau said:

I found the Danish FA's statement about football being about ordinary clubs dreaming of gold funny. It's a nice sentiment, but still funny.

 

How many Danish sides are going to win the CL? Or even the EL?! 

 

There is an elite group. The only way to restore parity would be to limit their spending and income, but will anyone do it?

Can't see that happening. FFP was their shot at that and it didnt work. Through the decades there have been clubs that have had more disposible income through investment or benefactors than others. In the 30's it was Arsenal.  Sunderland were once called the "The Bank of England" club back in the late 40s. Man Utd used to buy every good striker each season in the 70's and 80's and Liverpool had the Littlewoods Pools family behind them during the same period. Blackburn had access to funds in the early 90s and other clubs like Everton and Newcastle have spent the last few years trying to secure new onwers with funds, with Everton succeeding recently.   

 

What you cannot have is the tail wagging the dog, so i would stipulate that clubs (all clubs) are part of the cultural fabric of the area they operate in and have the governing bodies and governments/local authorities grant clubs special status that prevents any new owners from acting in a way that harms the supporters or the club. If it is a governing body sanctioned competition then fine, if not then the rules should prevent them taking part.

 

We have to ensure the mainly american owners understand that European football isn't built on a franchise model and never will be. MK Dons withstanding.  

Edited April 19, 2021 by ChelseaBoy
spelling

[Scott7 6,004]

5 hours ago, ian1964 said:

Klopp trying to work his ticket to parkhead to manage his boyhood heroes.

[Bill 13,717]

9 hours ago, Rousseau said:

I found the Danish FA's statement about football being about ordinary clubs dreaming of gold funny. It's a nice sentiment, but still funny.

 

How many Danish sides are going to win the CL? Or even the EL?! 

 

There is an elite group. The only way to restore parity would be to limit their spending and income, but will anyone do it?

How many of the founding Super League clubs have won the CL? Arsenal? Spurs? Man City? Ath Madrid?

[Bill 13,717]

This seems to have nothing at all to do with football or any notion of sporting competition ... and everything to do with a business model based on monopoly and assured income. How you regard it depends on which of those two issues is most important to you. In both sporting and business terms it appears to be a natural evolution of a process that's been operating in football for the last 20 years, since the Premier League and Sky Sports first showed what could be done to bring money and fans into the game, and UEFA allowed the "elite" clubs to dominate the Champions League. 

 

Initially, I didn't think this would work but having thought about it for a day I'm inclined to think it probably can't be stopped. Once the TV companies and main sponsors decide to move their interest to the Super League (and they will), the game will be up for UEFA, which will be forced to seek survival in an agreement with the Super League.

 

This is what you get when you sell your clubs to American owners. You could be forgiven for thinking this plan has been quietly cooking for several years. If this monster takes root it will squeeze the life out of those clubs who have mortgaged their souls to feed at the big boys' trough. Personally, I wish these Super League clubs would just move to become actual US franchises - if they did it might improve the European game immeasurably.