• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Project Big Picture

Seems like a £250m bribe to the EFL and a £100m bribe to theFA (plus ongoing sweeteners).
The result, the top 6 clubs get to dictate how English football is structured and own most of the players.

A power grab disguised as a revenue share.

Knowing how the big/rich clubs operate, this is also my take on it. These clubs, us included, only think about themselves and their own financial well being. They will never give that kind of support without expecting bigger favours in return.
 
Travel Cost less

Closer matches should mean more fans as less travel So larger gate receipt

Squad Size can be smaller Depending on split

Less player fatigue - Using Crawley as an example they could be away to Oldham on the Sat and then at home on the Tuesday

Followed by away to Barrow, home, then away to Exeter.

The amount of travel teams have to make is stupid, Carlisle to Exeter makes little sense at Div 2 level.
 
The issue with the proposals is two fold...
Timing - their exploiting the situation
Greed from owners buying clubs for pure ££
The two most successful clubs on these shores are owned by organisations that aren’t fans do the club, their ultimately leaches, using the clubs to feed other means and to make money
FSG have put more money into pool than the family have at united but it’s clear they just see the football clubs as money making machines
It’s fair to say that’s what an investment is but football clubs are much more than that by their own nature. The loyalty and emotional investment they hold over people is second to none, and add in the global outreach and their really unique by their very nature.
With these proposals, the fact their adding in teams like West Ham, Everton and Southampton into the golden ticket says it all to me. They know what their proposing is unpalatable to most so spread the benefit to as many teams as they can to bring them onboard
 
Followed by away to Barrow, home, then away to Exeter.

The amount of travel teams have to make is stupid, Carlisle to Exeter makes little sense at Div 2 level.
I’d played rugby to a decent standard and we had away games that were 3 hours away which was crazy for a none national level
 
I’d played rugby to a decent standard and we had away games that were 3 hours away which was crazy for a none national level
3 hours travel is a local derby in division 6 here. Clubs in England don't really know what travel is, so the "long" travel argument is just gonad*s.
 
Followed by away to Barrow, home, then away to Exeter.

The amount of travel teams have to make is stupid, Carlisle to Exeter makes little sense at Div 2 level.

Yeh I remember when Grays were close to making the league the major fear was cost because it being a predominately northern league, they even had a offer for a defender from Orient who turned down the move due to travel time affecting his family time.
 
3 hours travel is a local derby in division 6 here. Clubs in England don't really know what travel is, so the "long" travel argument is just gonad*s.
That’s a local league game here in Rugby
As in East Midlands so regional
Just in my town in football terms there are 4 sides that are “paid to play” sides which would be i guess your division 6 level
These are all clubs with stadiums, training facilities and a need for fans to help fund them. All be it most make their money from functions else did when the could
We have so many teams in England it’s crazy hence why in football terms you don’t have to travel far for a derby
 
Last edited:
Apart from reducing cost and travel time, regional leagues would help foster local rivalries, which could raise attendances and revenues. We already have regional leagues at lower levels so the question here is whether we change the number of national leagues at the top. Change could make the clubs at lower levels more stable and help maintain the deep league structure. It's certainly not unreasonable to revisit such questions occasionally.

I think making leagues one and two regional and only having two national leagues at the top is too much of a change. There might be a case for regional leagues replacing league two and the national league. This would be complicate by it involving two different league bodies, needing an expansion or reducton the EFL or a rejigging of the NL and feeder league, which is probably too political to succeed. As an aside who thought National League North and National League South makes any sense (its either national or not)
 
3 hours travel is a local derby in division 6 here. Clubs in England don't really know what travel is, so the "long" travel argument is just gonad*s.

Exeter to Carlisle or Gillingham to Carlisle is 6 hours, teams do know what tyravel is and do it regularly at the lower levels of the Pro-game.
 
With these proposals, the fact their adding in teams like West Ham, Everton and Southampton into the golden ticket says it all to me. They know what their proposing is unpalatable to most so spread the benefit to as many teams as they can to bring them onboard
Agreed. This bit stinks of securing the vote when decisions day comes....so transparent
 
UEFA have two International competitions, one of them partly run as a league.

They are to have three club competitions, partly run as leagues.

And now we have corporate US owners producing a smaller English league.


They REALLY hate the F.A. don't they, combined with wanting to rip more money from the supporters.


If some of the ideas were being mooted by others, then they might be worth discussing. Alas, they are 'affordable homes' bait for the big scheme, and I am dead set against what's afoot. Alas, and indeed, alack - I have no influence.
 
The loan system shake-up seems there to allow Chelsea and Emirates Marketing Project to continuing banking assets far beyond their capacity to actually use on the pitch and, instead, just use some players as revenue providers and churn through loans and transfers with barely an appearance in their own shirt.
 
The issue with the proposals is two fold...
Timing - their exploiting the situation
Greed from owners buying clubs for pure ££
The two most successful clubs on these shores are owned by organisations that aren’t fans do the club, their ultimately leaches, using the clubs to feed other means and to make money
FSG have put more money into pool than the family have at united but it’s clear they just see the football clubs as money making machines
It’s fair to say that’s what an investment is but football clubs are much more than that by their own nature. The loyalty and emotional investment they hold over people is second to none, and add in the global outreach and their really unique by their very nature.
With these proposals, the fact their adding in teams like West Ham, Everton and Southampton into the golden ticket says it all to me. They know what their proposing is unpalatable to most so spread the benefit to as many teams as they can to bring them onboard
Do I understand it West ham Everton Southampton golden ticket is giving them voting rights as a group of 9, where 2 thirds of the vote is need to pass the motion? So basically the ‘big 6’ can decide everything!
 
Back