Will we ever make the big four

[Villatillidie25]

It's not impossible. You could have asked the same question of ManU, Chelsea,Arsenal and ManCity a hundred years ago and it would have seemed a very fanciful suggestion.

How long it takes and what needs to change is another matter, The current pecking order, which probably has as much to do with TV rights as anything, is geared towards the status quo being preserved. It will probably take quite a few things to change, but BT kicking Sky to one side is probably one of them.

How exactly is this "one of them"

a) No one tv broadcaster can have all of the rights now so Sky, provided they bid, will always have some TV
b) If BT were to outbid Sky and become the dominant force then they would have had to have paid even more than the recent TV deal - i.e. it would solidify further the current pecking order, rather than anything else.

To blame the shortcomings of football on Sky is short-sighted, IMO. The real culprits are Uefa/Fifa and the Premier League.

The governing bodies - for establishing a "members club" in the Champions League which (given the group stage nature and resulting multiple entrants from each of the major leagues) virtually ensures the same clubs are in it each year, whilst developing a second tier European League that is not financially rewarding enough for teams to take it seriously and actually hinders those who enter it given the rigours of Thursday football and early season starts. The FFP rules brought in that have locked teams into the status quo, rather than generate an even playing field.

The Premier League - for developing (and all credit to them) such a marketable product with such wide appeal and then being allowed carte blanche on developing a bidding process that only benefits themselves.

[not3bad]

The most hopeful thing I can come up with is to remind everyone that "football is a funny old game".

[Dave]

I dare say that Lerner's acquisition of the club probably didn't fit the league's plan either.

I dare say that they probably weren't bothered too much either way.

[Percy McCarthy]

It's not impossible. You could have asked the same question of ManU, Chelsea,Arsenal and ManCity a hundred years ago and it would have seemed a very fanciful suggestion.

How long it takes and what needs to change is another matter, The current pecking order, which probably has as much to do with TV rights as anything, is geared towards the status quo being preserved. It will probably take quite a few things to change, but BT kicking Sky to one side is probably one of them.

How exactly is this "one of them"

a) No one tv broadcaster can have all of the rights now so Sky, provided they bid, will always have some TV
b) If BT were to outbid Sky and become the dominant force then they would have had to have paid even more than the recent TV deal - i.e. it would solidify further the current pecking order, rather than anything else.

To blame the shortcomings of football on Sky is short-sighted, IMO. The real culprits are Uefa/Fifa and the Premier League.

The governing bodies - for establishing a "members club" in the Champions League which (given the group stage nature and resulting multiple entrants from each of the major leagues) virtually ensures the same clubs are in it each year, whilst developing a second tier European League that is not financially rewarding enough for teams to take it seriously and actually hinders those who enter it given the rigours of Thursday football and early season starts. The FFP rules brought in that have locked teams into the status quo, rather than generate an even playing field.

The Premier League - for developing (and all credit to them) such a marketable product with such wide appeal and then being allowed carte blanche on developing a bidding process that only benefits themselves.

There is a posssibility/probability that Sky/BT will be 'kicked aside' by much bigger companies in future. And the bigger the broadcast income, the better it will be for competition. For illustration purposes: if each club gets a billion a year from PL broadcasters, then stadium size, CL income, sponsorship and rich owners become less and less relevant. PL clubs will have the world as their oyster for recruiting players and coaches who will be easier to retain, and all clubs will have equal training facilities and sports science staff.

[not3bad]

It's not impossible. You could have asked the same question of ManU, Chelsea,Arsenal and ManCity a hundred years ago and it would have seemed a very fanciful suggestion.

How long it takes and what needs to change is another matter, The current pecking order, which probably has as much to do with TV rights as anything, is geared towards the status quo being preserved. It will probably take quite a few things to change, but BT kicking Sky to one side is probably one of them.

How exactly is this "one of them"

a) No one tv broadcaster can have all of the rights now so Sky, provided they bid, will always have some TV
b) If BT were to outbid Sky and become the dominant force then they would have had to have paid even more than the recent TV deal - i.e. it would solidify further the current pecking order, rather than anything else.

To blame the shortcomings of football on Sky is short-sighted, IMO. The real culprits are Uefa/Fifa and the Premier League.

The governing bodies - for establishing a "members club" in the Champions League which (given the group stage nature and resulting multiple entrants from each of the major leagues) virtually ensures the same clubs are in it each year, whilst developing a second tier European League that is not financially rewarding enough for teams to take it seriously and actually hinders those who enter it given the rigours of Thursday football and early season starts. The FFP rules brought in that have locked teams into the status quo, rather than generate an even playing field.

The Premier League - for developing (and all credit to them) such a marketable product with such wide appeal and then being allowed carte blanche on developing a bidding process that only benefits themselves.

There is a posssibility/probability that Sky/BT will be 'kicked aside' by much bigger companies in future. And the bigger the broadcast income, the better it will be for competition. For illustration purposes: if each club gets a billion a year from PL broadcasters, then stadium size, CL income, sponsorship and rich owners become less and less relevant. PL clubs will have the world as their oyster for recruiting players and coaches who will be easier to retain, and all clubs will have equal training facilities ans sports science staff.

And maybe they'll even cut ticket prices.

Sorry, I'm just getting silly now.

[ktvillan]

I'd like to think we could do what Arsenal have done wherein they established themselves without recourse to a sugar daddy or being a glory hunter driven marketing empire.  However they were able to establish themselves firmly in the big 4 largely on the back of being consistently very good at the right time, when the CL first expanded, and thus having the advantage of several years of CL income when it made a massive difference.  Those conditions will not be repeated.  And isn't FFP an attempt to rule out even the Sugar Daddy option?   Because of the global marketing focusing on the big 4 plus Liverpool, and to a lesser extent maybe Spurs, their income will always remain a cut above the rest.  The best players will always gravitate towards the big names even if wages become more or less equal.   I think the elite are firmly entrenched, are becoming stronger by the year,  and are likely to remain so.   Same goes for the pan-European picture.  This was always the intention of the group of large and already wealthy clubs that started agitating for a larger slice of the TV pie back in the late 80s and early 90s.   They've got what they wanted, but as someone said above, they've broken football in the process.

[Percy McCarthy]

I don't think the intention of the Milan clubs, Juventus and Bayern Munich was ever to generate less TV income than Bournemouth.

Who would have predicted that a few years ago?*

*Me excluded.

[ktvillan]

There is a posssibility/probability that Sky/BT will be 'kicked aside' by much bigger companies in future. And the bigger the broadcast income, the better it will be for competition. For illustration purposes: if each club gets a billion a year from PL broadcasters, then stadium size, CL income, sponsorship and rich owners become less and less relevant. PL clubs will have the world as their oyster for recruiting players and coaches who will be easier to retain, and all clubs will have equal training facilities and sports science staff.

I can't see it Percy.  Prize and TV money will still be skewed towards those finishing higher and on TV more often - most likely to be the already established 4-6 clubs.  The best players will still want to play for those clubs that are winning things/most popular/most renowned.  The bulk of marketing income will still go to the established clubs.  The authorities will continue to support whatever suits the marketing needs - promotion of the big clubs.  I don't think there will ever be anything like a reasonably  level playing field again unless there is  a paradigm shift of the focus of the game back to sporting values and away from business values.  And that's about as likely as us winning the PL this year.

[Tom_Mc9?]

Not as things currently are.

[olaftab]

Sorry but in my world we have always been the Big One.

[ktvillan]

I don't think the intention of the Milan clubs, Juventus and Bayern Munich was ever to generate less TV income than Bournemouth.

Who would have predicted that a few years ago?*

*Me excluded.

They have the bulk of the TV rights money in their own countries and almost unbroken membership of the CL club, plus massive marketing pull, which I'd guess puts them a fair way ahead of Bournemouth in the financial clout league.   Those clubs did want this situation to point, but the next step should have been a full on European elite super league.  I guess they are now somewhat taken aback to see quite how big a marketing and money behemoth the PL has become, and it seems it will put the mockers on that final stage.  Serves them right.   

[Percy McCarthy]

There is a posssibility/probability that Sky/BT will be 'kicked aside' by much bigger companies in future. And the bigger the broadcast income, the better it will be for competition. For illustration purposes: if each club gets a billion a year from PL broadcasters, then stadium size, CL income, sponsorship and rich owners become less and less relevant. PL clubs will have the world as their oyster for recruiting players and coaches who will be easier to retain, and all clubs will have equal training facilities and sports science staff.

I can't see it Percy.  Prize and TV money will still be skewed towards those finishing higher and on TV more often - most likely to be the already established 4-6 clubs.  The best players will still want to play for those clubs that are winning things/most popular/most renowned.  The bulk of marketing income will still go to the established clubs.  The authorities will continue to support whatever suits the marketing needs - promotion of the big clubs.  I don't think there will ever be anything like a reasonably  level playing field again unless there is  a paradigm shift of the focus of the game back to sporting values and away from business values.  And that's about as likely as us winning the PL this year.

Only time will tell of course. The most important factor is that the majority of PL clubs are clever enough to enforce the continuation of collective bargaining, and maybe even use their numerical advantage to create fairer distribution of broadcast income. That the overseas rights continue to be distributed equally between all twenty clubs is vital. That will ensure that lots of the established or 'big club' advantages can be removed.

[pauliewalnuts]

Agree on the collective sale of tv rights abroad. If that ever stopped, it'd be the end of football for me.

Not sure that the television money is going to take away the advantages that really count. Man City, for example, seem to be immune to any form of economic limitations.

[KevinGage]

Will we one of the very best sides in the country again any time soon? 

Barring a change to the ownership situation, it would be impossible.

However, 15 + years ago, being 4th or even 3rd best didn't mean a whole pile.

There was talk of the CL being rejigged to include the top 8 sides in England a few years back, and that is something that may be revisited. If that were to occur, we might have some outside change of restoring a bit of prestige.

It's shite, on one level.  The European Cup should be about the champions of their respective countries.  But that ship sailed in 1993.  Revenue  is what it is ultimately all about, and Hamburg versus Aston Villa in a rejigged CL would hold more appeal than MK Zillina against Bate Borisov to the powers that be.

[Fred]

NO.