Project Big Picture [Project Wonga] a cynical grab for power under cover of trying to help EFL clubs: Post.

Abel Tasman said:
Probably because the EFL are desperate for their money. Let’s face it the EFL clubs are the PL Club’s “bitches”
Click to expand...
I know wishful thinking on my part, pipedream it certainly is but one I really hope would come true, sadly it wont
 
Zoophonic said:
Doesnt really matter to be honest - both clubs are considered part of the elite according to this proposal. But for the sake of argument Spurs have won two league titles, eight FA Cups, four League Cups, seven FA Community Shields, one European Cup Winners' Cup and two UEFA Cups. Tottenham were the runners-up in the Champions League. They have a bigger stadium and a bigger income stream. Everton have not won a major trophy for 25 years.
Click to expand...
Spurs haven't won the league for 60 years though, or an FA Cup for longer than Everton. In fact, Spurs have won little more than Boro in the last 30 years, in an era where even Leicester and Blackburn have won the league.

Anyway, my real point is that I think there's really a 'big 5'. Then 2 little cling-ons with a bit of money and big stadiums who helped form the PL. If stadium size matters then Newcastle and West Ham have to be seen as 'big clubs', and we all know they're not. The real achievement for Tottenham is the way they have managed to stay in this 'club' ever since the formation of the PL, without being very successful at all in that time. Fair play to the chairman for managing to achieve that, plus the national media who absolutely love them for whatever reason.
 
I am not arguing that Spurs have had recent success I was merely addressing your point about not understanding why Spurs over Everton. Never have much time for either clubs supporters to be honest. Both seem to have a sense of inflated entitlement when I hear them speak. Everton never mind Spurs haven't won as much as us in the past quarter century.

The big 5 or 6 is a pointless tag to be honest. Bsck in 1960 Liverpool probably wouldnt have been considered one of the big 6 or 5 or whatever you want to call them. Wolves though certainly would have been.
 
This question has been asked a good few times but what constitites a big club, between Man Utd winning the title in the late 60's & 1993 both Derby & Forest, smallish clubs, no disrespect to either, have won the top title, with Forest doing something United couldnt, win the european cup, defend it & win it again, thats when managers, teams won things when the money wasnt as onscene as today, then money came & has won the day the big clubs have grown to powerful & will continue to do so until they all end up ina little european bubble

Man City, Spurs spend fortunes to try & compete in europe, Spurs got to the final & lost, City continue to fail
 
Zoophonic said:
I am not arguing that Spurs have had recent success I was merely addressing your point about not understanding why Spurs over Everton. Never have much time for either clubs supporters to be honest. Both seem to have a sense of inflated entitlement when I hear them speak. Everton never mind Spurs haven't won as much as us in the past quarter century.

The big 5 or 6 is a pointless tag to be honest. Bsck in 1960 Liverpool probably wouldnt have been considered one of the big 6 or 5 or whatever you want to call them. Wolves though certainly would have been.
Click to expand...
True. I think its clear that there are 2 clubs from the NW, plus 1 from London, who have achieved sustained success for most of living memory. City and Chelsea have had enough recent success to demand a seat at the table obviously, but if I was a Spurs fan I think I'd prefer to keep out of it. They might actually win something when those 5 finally b***r off. They led and supported the formation of the PL and its largely worked out to be a disaster for them other than a CL final no one thought they stood a chance in.
 
atypical_boro said:
True. I think its clear that there are 2 clubs from the NW, plus 1 from London, who have achieved sustained success for most of living memory. City and Chelsea have had enough recent success to demand a seat at the table obviously, but if I was a Spurs fan I think I'd prefer to keep out of it. They might actually win something when those 5 finally b***r off. They led and supported the formation of the PL and its largely worked out to be a disaster for them other than a CL final no one thought they stood a chance in.
Click to expand...
Good point, Everton & Spurs as the top 2 :sneaky:
 
Certianly think Everton are on a level with Spurs.

Similar level of manager, couple of Star Players, new stadium soon. Won feck all for ages.
 
Block21 said:
Certianly think Everton are on a level with Spurs.

Similar level of manager, couple of Star Players, new stadium soon. Won feck all for ages.
Click to expand...
This is my point really, arguments for both, totally inconclusive though, and if I was a fan of either club I'd rather be kept out of it.
 
Sad though it will be but when the top clubs “b***r off” as you put it succinctly Spurs will be amongst them. No question.
 
Zoophonic said:
Sad though it will be but when the top clubs “b***r off” as you put it succinctly Spurs will be amongst them. No question.
Click to expand...
It sad to 'lose' those clubs (when the inevitable happens) but in my mind we've already lost them. Man City, as the best example, don't resemble anything at all that their history and tradition resembles, and not just the success but everything about the club and even the fans' attitude. Its only the same club in name, I'd prefer it if they just called a spade and spade and renamed the club 'City Football Group plc - Manchester department (HQ)'. That's all it is now.

Its like in a zombie film where someone has to get rid of a relative whose turned. They feel sad at killing their wife or whatever but we all know its not really their wife, its just some other being that has occupied its physical embodiment. I do feel sorry for the long term fans whose stomachs are actually turning deep down (even if they don't admit to it). Its a conflicted place to be.
 
Last edited:
I grew up in Manchester amongst City fans. Those I keep in touch with some of them are not that comfortable with the new City.
 
Zoophonic said:
I grew up in Manchester amongst City fans. Those I keep in touch with some of them are not that comfortable with the new City.
Click to expand...
Same here, I didn't grow up here but I live here now. Some of them get it, but most buy into this new 'model' and go to watch New York City play and go to Abu Dhabi on their holidays etc to pay 'homage' to their spiritual Emperor. We've lost them, they're gone. Mission accomplished for their owners.
 
Juninho10 said:
In my eyes..... the default main English league is the Championship (not just because we're in it) - Premier League is like another world these days
Click to expand...
Agree with that, it shouldn’t really be associated, it is a different commodity and should be pushed towards some sort of European League, as it is more geared towards global support than local support, I can’t remember the last time I sat down and watched a full EPL game, it has sold it’s soul in my book.
 
Juninho10 said:
In my eyes..... the default main English league is the Championship (not just because we're in it) - Premier League is like another world these days
Click to expand...
I agree. It is as if the PL is just a generic sort of European league with a few stars from around the globe, which happens to be hosted within these shores. It has all the biggest name managers and hardly any English ones (or players).

I'm not even against the formation of a Euro Super League and in some ways I wish they'd just get on with it given that it feels almost inevitable. I view it a bit like the IPL in cricket, good fun to watch and I wouldn't refuse to acknowledge its existence or anything, but its a totally different dog to the football/cricket I grew up with.

There was always the obstacle of fans getting to away games before, not an issue atm!

EDIT: There's actually a few more English managers than I thought at present. Though none of the English ones are managing the better sides.

EDIT: Ok, except Lampard.
 
Last edited:
A 18 team Ringfenced Premier League - Richest Owners first.
Rangers and Celtic will be fancied over the less well funded teams, the rest of the owners will be buying coverage/brand recognition.

You can almost see the franchises now. Manchester Red Devils vs The London Spurs

1: Abu Dhabi Group / Sheikh Mansour, £23.3bn - Manchester City

2: Roman Abramovich, £10.16bn - Chelsea

3: Denise, John and Peter Coates, £7.17bn - Stoke City

4: Stan Kroenke, £6.8bn - Arsenal

5: Fosun International, £5.2bn - Wolves

6: Nassef Sawiris/Wes Edens, £5bn - Aston Villa

7: Srivaddhanaprabha family, £4.6bn - Leicester City

8: Joe Lewis, £3.9bn - Tottenham Hotspur

9: Glazer Family, £3.8bn - Manchester United

10: Gao Jisheng, £3.1bn - Southampton

11: Joshua Harris, £2.7bn - Crystal Palace

12: Fenway Sports group / John Henry, £2.1bn - Liverpool

13: Mike Ashley, £1.95bn - Newcastle United

14: Farhad Moshiri, £1.88bn - Everton

15: David Sullivan / David Gold, £1.6bn - West Ham United

16: Steve Lansdown, £1.35bn - Bristol City

17: Tony Bloom, £1.3bn - Brighton & Hove Albion

18: Trevor Hemmings, £1.03bn - Preston North End

Make no mistake this is a power grab, in the long term it's massively detrimental to EFL clubs. The premier clubs will have their local identity globalised to such an extent they will be hardly recognisable.

Would you go for it? If you had the choice of being locked into the premier 18 as the Chinese owned Red Lions?
 
newyddion said:
A 18 team Ringfenced Premier League - Richest Owners first.
Rangers and Celtic will be fancied over the less well funded teams, the rest of the owners will be buying coverage/brand recognition.

You can almost see the franchises now. Manchester Red Devils vs The London Spurs

1: Abu Dhabi Group / Sheikh Mansour, £23.3bn - Manchester City

2: Roman Abramovich, £10.16bn - Chelsea

3: Denise, John and Peter Coates, £7.17bn - Stoke City

4: Stan Kroenke, £6.8bn - Arsenal

5: Fosun International, £5.2bn - Wolves

6: Nassef Sawiris/Wes Edens, £5bn - Aston Villa

7: Srivaddhanaprabha family, £4.6bn - Leicester City

8: Joe Lewis, £3.9bn - Tottenham Hotspur

9: Glazer Family, £3.8bn - Manchester United

10: Gao Jisheng, £3.1bn - Southampton

11: Joshua Harris, £2.7bn - Crystal Palace

12: Fenway Sports group / John Henry, £2.1bn - Liverpool

13: Mike Ashley, £1.95bn - Newcastle United

14: Farhad Moshiri, £1.88bn - Everton

15: David Sullivan / David Gold, £1.6bn - West Ham United

16: Steve Lansdown, £1.35bn - Bristol City

17: Tony Bloom, £1.3bn - Brighton & Hove Albion

18: Trevor Hemmings, £1.03bn - Preston North End

Make no mistake this is a power grab, in the long term it's massively detrimental to EFL clubs. The premier clubs will have their local identity globalised to such an extent they will be hardly recognisable.

Would you go for it? If you had the choice of being locked into the premier 18 as the Chinese owned Red Lions?
Click to expand...
No thanks
 
A government bail out as an alternative to premier League money, no way should public money be put into football after players and agents have and are being paid millions up millions of pounds, absolutely no way. If the EFL model isn't sustainable and if they turn down the premier League money, then we just have to sit and watch what happens but lots of clubs won't exist and we would have to pick the pieces up from there.

If that happens is that not the bigger championship clubs doing exactly the same to the smaller league clubs who will never make the premier league but need the money to stay in existence and remain competitive within the league's they operate, but the championship clubs looking after themselves and denying the majority of clubs below them, self interest at every level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top