MAF asked this question in his own inimitable style last season, but you do have to wonder. Fresh from their studied inaction over Portsmouth’s plight, news emerged of the league’s plan to launch their own global TV channel to rake in some more money on the day the south coast club went into administration. A question of priorities.
Are the Premier League mad?
by hammyend.com | Feb 27, 2010 | Uncategorized | 19 comments
19 Comments
Submit a Comment
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Dan,
I would be very curious on your thoughts on the MAF article. I know it is dated from last year but I found the Daily Mail article fascinating.With Portsmouth going into administration this article brings up two items that could have prevented it.
First, I have been extremely hesitant to discuss a “salary cap” in the EPL. With the sport of American Football “the cap” has really helped in making the NFL as even as possible. It is true that almost everyone of 32 teams has a shot to get into the playoffs. I would say more than half of the teams can legitimately compete for a Championship. The cap has given all 32 teams and its fans a feeling that they can compete every year.
Second, this is the part of the article that really grabbed me. The money from TV rights is not equally shared in the EPL. It all matters on your position in the league. In the NFL they do have” revenue sharing” meaning that each team gets the same amount of the pie.The TV money rights for exmaple in the NFL is huge. Each team gets the same broadcast rights money. I am not positive of the exact amount. I believe it is way above 100 million a year. I would say the amount is probably close to the cap number. This way each team without doing anything else should have the money to pay for players just from tv. This makes the league competitive from top to bottom.
A salary cap and revenue sharing are 2 ways the NFL has become so viable. I am not saying the the EPL should do these 2 things. I think it would have to be done worldwide which I don’t think you are going to see.
I would really be curious in your thoughts.
I’m not Dan but I’d argue that the Premier League really needs to be taking a stronger line in the governance of their clubs. Portsmouth should never have been allowed to get to the position they were in months ago let alone now and the fit and proper person test is a joke.
The trouble with a salary cap, appealing though it is, is that a legal firm acting on behalf of an insulted player will head straight for the European courts and claim that such an action is in restraint of trade/infringing their rights. Plus any rule change has to be backed by the clubs and the chairmen won’t vote for it.
On TV revenues, they should be shared equally amongst the football pyramid but the big clubs are only interested in securing as much of a share of the pie as possible for themselves. It really needs the fans to step up and take action, although the language the owners’ understand – hitting them in the pocket by not attending games – would only serve to deprieve the supporters of following their team.
Not sure if any of that makes sense but something needs to be done.
Chloe,
A salary cap won’t happen for the reasons you just said. It would also have to be agreed by every major league worldwide. It would have to apply in countries like Spain, Italy, and Germany. This is also why you are not going to see it.
The revenue sharing is way that might have been able to prevent what is happening in Portsmouth. However you have 4 or 5 teams now that would probably not want this to happen. It works in the NFL. The Patriots are one of the best teams in the league every year. They get the same amount as the Detroit Lions. The idea is that everyone wins because the league is so competitive. This means more ad revenue and more money from merchandise sold. All the teams should be financially viable. I don’t think you will ever see a Portsmouth situation in the NFL..
No, but, as I understand it, you do see NFL franchises move around an awful lot. UEFA’s financial fair play proposals are the closest thing I’ve seen to something sensible on football finance lately.
You won’t get revenue sharing in the Premier League, either, at least not while the big four (probably the big five now with Manchester City) are there.
There are practical steps the FA can take though to avoid financial doping as Platini calls it:
1. The Premier League will introduce some financial changes next month – forcing clubs to be on time with all payments and guarantee future cashflow. It might have made Portsmouth’s position more palatable had they moved earlier.
2. Giving that fit and proper person test some clout and handing it over to an independent legal body (perhaps BERR, the Treasury or the Home Office) would act against phoney owners.
3. Owners should be in for the long-term – they should have to commit to at least two seasons in charge before being allowed to launch a takeover. This might encourage some stability.
4. Those UEFA fair play financial controls would prevent Portsmouth (or another club) from spending more than they receive. This is perhaps most crucial of all.
It’s important to remember that Fulham are heavily in debt as well and our future position is very dubious.
Chloe,
You are very sharp. NFL teams have moved. You are correct. In the case of the Cleveland Bronws they moved to Baltimore to become the Ravens. This was an awful thing for Cleveland. The NfL years later gave the city of Cleveland an expansion franchise. There have been financial issues of course. The worst case scenario is that a franchise moves. This is usually done over greed.Trust me I am not saying the NFL doesn’t have its problems. It has a big one right now with no collective bargaining agreement.
What I am saying is that maybe things could have been different if there was revenue sharing in regards to the tv money. That’s all I am trying to say. I hate to see what is happening in Portsmouth. Those fans don’t deserve it.
On Baltimore and the NFL, what about the Colts leaving and going to Indianapolis? See here for the British take on the recent HBO documentary that I emailed to timmyg recently:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2010/feb/22/baltimore-colts-ravens-bob-irsay
Dan,
I know you are right that you won’t see revenue sharing because of let’s call them now the big 5. You have to include Manchester City based on how much money they have. That was my point earlier. These 5 teams would never want to share it evenly. That is why I should have never started commenting about a salary cap or revenue sharing. It is not going to happen.
You bring up a good point about Fulham. This is something we should be concerned about.
It’s something that the Fulham Supporters’ Trust are working on at the moment with Supporters’ Direct and other football bodies. Any concerned Fulham fan should really join.
Dan,
First of all this doc is well done. It was terrible what happened to Baltimore. This was also 25 years ago. This was before a salary cap. In this case it was all about the Bob Irsay fighting with the City and greed.
What makes me crazy is that Baltimore then takes the Cleveland Browns. As I stated earlier I don’t think the NFL is perfect.
This is why I should have never started this. We can go on and on.
I will just ask you a question though. Would you like Fulham to be financially viable and be able to compete every year for the championship? Right now as you mentioned Fulham’s debt is sometthing to be concerned about and we won’t be challenging for the league anytime soon.
Dan,
First of all this doc is well done. It was terrible what happened to Baltimore. This was also 25 years ago. This was before a salary cap. In this case it was all about the Bob Irsay fighting with the City and greed.
What makes me crazy is that Baltimore then takes the Cleveland Browns. As I stated earlier I don’t think the NFL is perfect.
This is why I should have never started this. We can go on and on.
I will just ask you a question though. Would you like Fulham to be financially viable and be able to compete every year for the championship? Right now as you mentioned Fulham’s debt is something to be concerned about and we won’t be challenging for the league anytime soon.
How do I join?
Feel free to start a discussion on whatever you like it’s very interesting. The American model’s not perfect but it’s a lot better than what we have at the moment IMO.
As for your question, I’d take Fulham being financially viable tomorrow over challenging for the title. I don’t think the latter’s going to happen and the former will probably take 5-10 years to materialise. My concern is if MAF pulls out, Fulham could drop like a stone.
If you want to join the Supporters’ Trust send me an email and we’ll go from there – it’s daniel.s.crawford@hotmail.com
Dan,
I appreciate your opinions and the many people who read these comments. Talking about revenue sharing and a salary cap is interesting. I will leave it for another time. Trust me I have problems with the NFL. There might be a lockout in 2 years meaning no football in 2011.
Your original post was actually about the EPL having its own network and announcing it now. I think we are in agreement that this is bad timing.
Fulham being financially viable is definitely more important. I completely agree with you. Is there a chance he pulls out?
It’s more about what happens after he leaves really.
Completely separate beasts – you cannot compare them. The NFL is a completely closed system. The EPL is a completely open one. The NFL teams do not face promotion and relegation. NFL players cannot play in any other league or country so is ‘forced’ into accepting the club (via the draft) and salary from that club (via the cap). An EPL club cannot bank on being in the EPL next year, let alone in 5 years time. An EPL player can accept more money to play for any other club IN THE WORLD. The other thing is that if the best players are not playing in the EPL the league will lose TV money from countries around the world who will tune into the Italian or Spanish leagues.
All very good points Lamby and I’m not saying I’d accept any American-style changes – just that it’s interesting to observe from over here about how their sports are run by way of comparison. What’s clear though, with the number of clubs in administration of financial difficulty, is that English football simply can’t go on like this.
Fulham does not really have a debt. MAF ‘loans’ Fulham (which he owns) about £10mil a year for the 15-18 years he has owned the club. Fulham is under no obligation to pay this back or pay interest on it. I is a ‘paper’ loan for tax deduction purposes.
If MAF every sells the club the debt is irrelevant – he owns the club, so he owns the debt.
I think MAF sees the £10mil a year as part of owning an EPL club and good value for money – if he didn’t put it in, the club might drop out of the Premier League, dropping the value of his ‘asset’ by much more than £10mil
There’s a few things here. We’re about £260m in debt to MAF, which he can call in at any time and such financial insecurity could discourage any future bidders from buying the club. The fact that the Cottage is on such prime real estate land makes Fulham an attractive site for luxury flats – a scenario we’ve been through already with MAF.
MAF’s owned the club for 13 years, rather than 15-18, and he’s now taking money out rather than ploughing it in – so the financial position is brought into sharper focus.