European super league

[liquidfootball2]

http://m.spiegel.de/international/world ... 36415.html

Lots of debate on this new league and tbf its long been thought to be an inevitability.

(There may be an existing thread, but I couldn't find it)

The staggering sums involved 400m guaranteed for the permanent members compared to the possible 90m for getting to the champions league final which has to be the driving force.

Although the premier league clubs domestic earnings generated from premier league TV rights in terms of earnings puts them at a substantial advantage when compared to the European clubs earnings from their leagues, you can see why the talks are advanced.

The prem clubs could see it as leverage to obtain a bigger piece of the pie at national and European level and have already obtained some concessions at Champions league level, but 400m guaranteed will greatly interest foreign owners of the 'top FIVE' - without Spurs - premier league clubs.

American owners especially like the no promotion and relegation, with finances guaranteed and TV rights exploding, the fans don't really come in to it much.

five English clubs, Chelsea, United, City, Arsenal and Liverpool...

The five English clubs are already due to make tens of millions of pounds extra each in new TV rights deals with the existing premier league

Carsten Thode, chief strategy officer of marketing agency Synergy, said he had been aware of the talks, but said an English breakaway is “deeply unlikely”.

“These talks stretch back a decade and are simply about negotiating leverage as far as the English teams are concerned,” he said. “Last time we saw more clubs in the Champions League as a result of this. Uefa, in particularly, will figure out how to get these clubs more money, and this whole thing is likely to go away. The English market is just way too important to the clubs.”

From a players personal point of view it would likely mean being denied any chances of playing for their country too, not massive for all players but certainly important to a lot if not the majority...

Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City and Manchester United could be warned their players face bans from international tournaments if they join the European Super League breakaway.

Uefa and Fifa have the option of warning all players involved that they could become ineligible for World Cups and European Championships if Europe’s biggest teams press ahead with the alleged secret plans to form their own league by 2021.


Bombshell claims that breakaway talks have reached an advanced stage place the clubs on a collision course with governments, as well as domestic and international governing bodies.

The UK Government is also understood to “fully oppose” any Premier League team proposals to join forces with Real Madrid, Barcelona, Juventus, Paris Saint-Germain, AC Milan and Bayern Munich. Whitehall and the Premier League have been caught off guard by the series of leaked legal documents published by Der Spiegel and Reuters.

One senior Whitehall source said: “The Government hasn’t been told about any of this, which suggests the Premier League has also been kept in the dark. We would absolutely oppose this on the basis that it would threaten the culture of sport in England.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/20 ... -threaten/


I suspect the appetite for the new league is greatest on the European continent where the leagues make far less money from TV coverage than the premier league and those clubs have often looked at how they can vastly increase their share.

The transfers fees that even moderate premier league clubs can pay are looked on with envy by many, thus a premier league premium can often be added to a fee.

These talks may well give the English clubs leverage and do them no harm at all.

Very decent Times article worth reading, concentrates on Pochettino and Spurs and how its seen from their viewpoint of a 'top five' who have completely ignored and met in secret thus relegating them, new stadium and all to an 'inferior' status. 

Its under a paywall so I've printed it here -by David Walsh


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...u ... -b0s9sd6pq


There is a story from Mauricio Pochettino’s 2017 book, Brave New World, that is hard to forget. Young Poch is 13 years of age, one of 3,540 people living in Murphy, a town in Argentina. His potential has been noted and once or twice a week he takes a bus to Rosario, 100 miles distant, to train with Central, a team in Argentina’s Primera Division.

He hates the three-hour journey but dreams are dreams and it’s a trade-off. One Monday evening there is a trial for young players at Villa Canas, a town 31 miles from Murphy. Not any old trial but one arranged by a local coach for the benefit of Marcelo Bielsa and Jorge Griffa, well-known coaches at mighty Newell’s Old Boys, Central’s big rivals in Rosario. Pochettino was invited to Villa Canas but even at 13, the boy had a mind of his own. He had had a long day at school that Monday and the tiredness from two weekend matches was still in his legs. He told his dad he did not have much enthusiasm for the drive to Villa Canas. His dad said that was fine.

The trial ended shortly before 10pm. Bielsa and Griffa sat down to eat with the local coach. Having assimilated the evidence of the evening’s trial, the visitors from Rosario asked the local man if there was any boy who had not played that evening but who might be one for the future. “There is one lad from Murphy, a kid called Pochettino, who is good.”

“Murphy,” they thought. “That’s not that far away.” It was after 11pm when they left Villa Canas, well past midnight when they got to a service station on the edge of Murphy and almost 1am when they knocked on the door of the Pochettino home. Mothers sleep lightly, so it was Amalia Pochettino who answered. They explained who they were. She refused to allow them in, returning instead to the bedroom, where she told her husband about the strangers.

“What, Bielsa and Griffa? I know who they are.” A minute later the Pochettinos sat with the coaches and heard what they had been told about young Mauricio. It made them proud. Fifteen minutes into the conversation, the coaches asked if they could see the boy. They would not wake him, just observe him while he slept. Inside his bedroom, the four adults gazed at the sleeping beauty.

“Would it be possible to pull back the covers,” asked Griffa, “so I can see his legs.” Amalia rolled back the covers. “He looks like a footballer,” one of them said. “Look at those legs.”

The boy became a man. Played for Newell’s Old Boys and Jorge Griffa became his football father. He spent most of his time playing at Espanyol in Barcelona and played 20 times for Argentina. It is, however, as a manager that he has built his reputation. Over the past four years his work with Tottenham Hotspur has positioned him in the front line of the world’s best football coaches.

Bielsa and Griffa’s late-night visit to his home in 1985 struck a chord with Pochettino. For in them he saw reflections of his young self. Their passion was his passion; their obsession his obsession. He cried when his hero Diego Maradona spoke after his testimonial game at Boca’s stadium in 2001. “I’ve made mistakes,” said Diego. “I’ve paid for them. But my love for the ball is still pure.” So, too, it has always been for Pochettino.

With the cost of their new stadium, Tottenham do not have the hundreds of millions their rivals spend so freely. His job is to convince some of the best young players in Europe that there is more to football than the monthly transfer that swells their bank account. Convincing them of this is not as straightforward as getting them to press the opposition but, so far, Pochettino is winning. In the Premier League narrative, Tottenham have been one of the inspiring storylines.

So, put yourself inside the head of Tottenham’s manager travelling to the Black Country for yesterday’s match against Wolverhampton Wanderers. Sitting on the coach he searches for Der Spiegel’s English website and begins to read their long article about Europe’s biggest clubs forming an exclusive Super League. It would begin with seven clubs, the founding fathers: Manchester United and Arsenal, Real Madrid and Barcelona, Juventus and AC Milan, Bayern Munich. An American, Charlie Stillitano, is the entrepreneur driving the talks. His numbers had turned people’s heads, drawn them to clandestine meetings and got them asking big questions of their legal advisers. What can we do here? Would it be possible to just walk away from the Champions League? And domestic leagues? Could we exit La Liga, Serie A, the Premier League?
It was more than a year ago that he had seen a story in The Sun about one of those secret “European Super League” meetings in London. He wasn’t sure whether to believe it. But here in Der Spiegel’s well-sourced story, they reproduce a line from an email written by an adviser to Manchester City’s Abu Dhabi owners to the club’s chief executive, Ferran Soriano, concerning that story in The Sun. “We need to be very careful moving forward and avoid at all costs the perception of a cartel,” said the adviser. Soriano replied by saying that the clubs would have to find a more private venue for future meetings.
So it was true. These guys have been meeting, planning, deciding the best way forward. The original seven became 11. The two English conspirators were joined by Liverpool, Manchester City and Chelsea. Stillitano was telling them to forget the old Champions League model, with its paltry tens of millions of payments. He was talking of annual revenues of £440m-plus to clubs in the Super League and guaranteed inclusion for the first 20 years.

Of course 11 clubs would not be enough, so Stillitano and his cohorts were going to include Borussia Dortmund, Inter Milan, Roma, Marseilles and Atletico Madrid. These would be “guests,” not part of the cartel. There was talk of Schalke 04 and getting an 18th club from Holland, Russia, Portugal or Turkey.

And as Pochettino reads through to the last sentence of this story, your heart sinks as your anger rises. So much planning for this league, so many “secret meetings” and in this detailed report about what has been going on, there are two words never uttered. Tottenham Hotspur. The big six has been reduced to the big five, with the complicity of the big five. You think of the evening at the Etihad, January 2017. Son Heung-min’s 73rd-minute goal got you a 2-2 draw, probably more than you deserved but satisfying all the same. Afterwards Pep Guardiola came smilingly towards you and said: “Now, tell me all about Monaco.” You had played Monaco in pool matches and now Manchester City had them in the next round. Naturally you wanted to help because even though you are Premier League rivals, there is an affinity with the clubs in your league.

You think about Soriano wanting “a more private venue” for meetings to which your club will not be invited, you think about the people planning for this Super League and you feel betrayed. And you know that every manager and every chief executive of every Premier League club outside the conspirators will feel betrayed. The same for the excluded in Serie A, La Liga and the Bundesliga. In their thirst for ever more riches, the big money men sell the soul of the game. And you think of the little boy you were in Murphy, on the bus journey to Rosario that had so many stops you often likened it to a postman doing his rounds. It was hard back then but at least you could love the game.

How ‘Super League’ might look
Real Madrid are the key players in plans for a 16-team European Super League in 2021, according to a report from the German magazine Der Spiegel based on leaked documents. It claims:
■ Seven of the 11 ‘founders’ of the proposed league went behind Uefa’s back to discuss it: Real, Barcelona, Man United, Arsenal, Juventus, AC Milan and Bayern Munich
■ The other founders would be Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool and Paris Saint-Germain. The 11 founders could not be relegated
■ Another five teams would have ‘guest’ status for the opening season of the competition: Atletico Madrid, Inter Milan, Roma, Borussia Dortmund and Marseilles
■ Two more teams could join later: possibly Schalke from the Bundesliga plus a side from Portugal, Holland, Russia or Turkey. Bayern Munich said it was ‘unaware of recent plans for a so-called Super League’ and had not ‘taken part in negotiations relating to such plans’. The other clubs named above have not responded.

[forestfan]

The big problem is that there are clubs who have outgrown their domestic leagues (Bayern, Juve) so need a new way forward. But this feels like it would be a disaster for most parties involved in European football.

It would kill the English football pyramid (if, for example, Forest could no longer theoretically get back to the top in England/Europe, continuing as a professional club would effectively be pointless, as I would see it). It would be a league for the overseas fans, while local derbies such as Liverpool-Everton and Arsenal-Spurs would potentially be lost, as well as top level football becoming confined to two regions of England.

Also a closed shop league would result in lots of “exhibition” matches, that meant nothing later in the season. A hierarchy would emerge and some teams would be stuck at the bottom year after year. Maybe an NFL-style draft system would emerge, but that system in America is dependent on the college system and there’s no equivalent in Europe. Small clubs wouldn’t develop players for the big teams’ benefit.

It’s probably going to happen at some point though, as money talks. Maybe there will be a compromise that doesn’t threaten the integrity of national leagues.

[blahblah]

Lots of debate on this new league and tbf its long been thought to be an inevitability.

(There may be an existing thread, but I couldn't find it)

Yep, and there must be a few, or the discussion is in a fair few.

I doubt it will stop with Europe and it will be global, imho.

Interestingly though, I read a piece about "Brexit" helping an NFL team being based here due to tax complications within the EU. I can't remember if it explained the problem properly, but I think it is related to the Club actually being American in terms of wages, a base over there etc. Rugby League has a Canadian Club, so the Brexit thing could just be more Brexit baloney.

[murf]

Inevitable but I fear it will be sooner rather than the hoped for later.

I'm a Liverpool fan and (many may disagree but) I'd prefer to see them playing the likes of Leicester/Everton/Huddersfield week in, week out rather than Bayern Munich/Juve/Atletico. European competition was great because it was 'exotic' back in the day but even that is dull now with teams playing in the CL every year and having group matches which mean nothing to anybody but the four clubs involved. Only gets my interest when Liverpool are in it, I rarely watch the final even if they aren't in it.

IF it happened I hope it is just the peak of a pyramid with no guaranteed places and relegation etc (imagine the cross-Europe end of season play offs to get a place back in it!).

Would they really want 6 English teams and, if not, what happens to, say, Spurs if they miss out????

Still no use to teams like Celtic if they can never get there......

[Tacalabala]

Their problem is that ultimately someone has to finish bottom, and inevitably Real Madrid would dominate in the end, and then that'd argue they are the main draw and deserve more money. Why would the guest teams agree to this, when you are talking about clubs that are massive in their own right?

Surely they would seek to challenge this through all legal means available, particularly Inter Milan who would never accept being second fiddle to AC Milan.

[Zimmerman]

Whilst it does appear inevitable it will happen, I half assume it’s just a ruse to milk some more money from the domestic coffers.

Wasn’t there recent talk of a world club tournament that had a massive purse promised.

Whilst we think it would be amazing... the novelty would wear off. Like Murf I’m largely bored by the CL nowadays... but is that because it is a procession for the most part? Maybe a league with all of the best teams - it would be competitive, it would be interesting.

Then again - how would it be to be mid-low table in a super league and enduring defeats more regularly than any of them are used to?

And what of the fans? Would it be that much different to today ie I have a season ticket, I watch all the home games, I don’t go to away games (used to pre-family). I know a contingent go to every away game, there’d be the ones impacted/annoyed.

[blahblah]

Would they really want 6 English teams and, if not, what happens to, say, Spurs if they miss out????

Struggling with a 1bn stadium and no\little TV cash

[forestfan]

Would they really want 6 English teams and, if not, what happens to, say, Spurs if they miss out????

Struggling with a 1bn stadium and no\little TV cash

At least they would win a trophy every year

[blahblah]

Would they really want 6 English teams and, if not, what happens to, say, Spurs if they miss out????

Struggling with a 1bn stadium and no\little TV cash

At least they would win a trophy every year

Who? AFC Tottenham playing on Hackney Marshes?

[forestfan]

Would they really want 6 English teams and, if not, what happens to, say, Spurs if they miss out????

Struggling with a 1bn stadium and no\little TV cash

At least they would win a trophy every year

Who? AFC Tottenham playing on Hackney Marshes?

London Jaguars would bail them out stadium-wise

[blahblah]

Would they really want 6 English teams and, if not, what happens to, say, Spurs if they miss out????

Struggling with a 1bn stadium and no\little TV cash

At least they would win a trophy every year

Who? AFC Tottenham playing on Hackney Marshes?

London Jaguars would bail them out stadium-wise

I doubt Fulham could move that far? (That is his NFL lot?)

He could probably get it for less than half price though

[forestfan]

Interesting debate, if the big five/six did bigger off, who would emerge as best of the rest, and dominate a rump Premier League?

It probably would depend on debts and who lost out the most from what would effectively be a (permanent) relegation. The financial backers might all walk away and just leave part-time clubs to survive below the ESL.

[blahblah]

It would depend on TV cash, as a fair few would be unsustainable. Would there be enough demand for anything more than the current EFL deal? Apart from Spurs and Everton the rest have been in it recently so wouldn't merit more cash, imho.

As was discussed elsewhere, it does depend how it is structured and my guess was, and still is, a set up similar to the NFL re Conferences, Divisions etc including the fixture rotation thing. In theory this allows for expansion, and seems more interesting to the Owners than a second Division and promotion\relegation?

In a similar vein (ie cash), I don't see how WHam have got away with the £3m rent on that stadium.

[Tacalabala]

Wasn’t there recent talk of a world club tournament that had a massive purse promised.

Yeah, FIFA/Infantino basically wanted to replicate the World Cup formula, i.e. FIFA take huge cut for 'servicing'. The clubs obviously feel, legitimately, they can run their own tournament without them. When FIFA are morally bankrupt, they can't then turn around preaching to the clubs about greed. Of course, FIFA and UEFA do have the trump card of shutting the players out of the World Cup and Euros, are the players really going to be happy to give that up? The counter to that is the breakaway could have their own international teams an competition, but it'd never be acceptable as legitimate.

Forest - I think a lot of people might turn away from the breakaway clubs and follow their local club more.

[liquidfootball2]

I'm very much on the same page as Forest and think the attraction for the one or two team leagues of Germany, France and Italy, far greater.

No promotion no relegation, virtually the same teams year in, year out, and anyone who thinks the temporary invitees would change identity often hasn't looked at the figures too closely imo, the wealth gap would soon make it a permanent and never changing eighteen after a certain time.

And thinking about it a bit more, having read The Times piece, what would be the point of it? They would be playing for one thing, and one thing only; the title. 

No more CL/EL qualifying excitement.
No more CL/EL games.
No more FA Cup
No more League Cup.
No fights to stay up or stop being drawn into a potential relegation battle

Maybe not for a season or two but eventually, and perhaps fairly quickly too, the best and most powerful teams will gain ascendency and with it a greater share of tv money and power, 95% of games would end up actually count for nothing and be completely meaningless. Who would pay to watch live, largely futile non event matches, involving the same teams, week in week out and that includes TV viewing? 

And if they then see early interest fade, and the TV deals start to creak as folk tire of watching nothing games between the same no hopers in front of uninterested half empty stadiums, what then?

It just doesn't work for me, but I can see the very great attraction for the likes of PSG, Bayern, Juventus and AC Milan, it's obvious as their leagues aren't at all competitive, the same team(s) - either one or two teams who are dominant now, will be for the foreseeable future.

The premier league has had Arsenal, Chelsea, United, City (and Leicester) winning it this century and battles between Arsenal and United, then Chelsea and United and latterly City, these battles taking place over several years with the prominent teams changing although United were virtually an ever present. City atm are threatening to make it into a one team league but its far from definite for the foreseeable. Even the Spanish league has only really Barca or Real who win it regularly, with an odd exception with Atleti, but as with the Leicester triumph, these exceptions are rare.

The premier league is so completely a different case altogether, it's unique and by a long way the most lucrative thus making this breakaway far less attractive for premier league clubs and the disadvantages all the greater.

[blahblah]

That may be true, but where does the TV money come from? I very much doubt that it is this disunited kingdom. Money talks and the Clubs will move if the crowds\support dwindle, which is why I think the NFL model is the way it will go ie 2 things to win on the way to the Final....

How few of the English clubs are owned by paternalistic local businessmen? Do you think Roman will think twice about moving to somewhere that he can build a sexy stadium? The Glazers to somewhere that they are not hated? (I would use foreign examples, but I don't them well enough )

[Tacalabala]

That may be true, but where does the TV money come from? I very much doubt that it is this disunited kingdom. Money talks and the Clubs will move if the crowds\support dwindle, which is why I think the NFL model is the way it will go ie 2 things to win on the way to the Final.... If you can imagine all the money for all the major leagues, including the Champions League, being concentrated into 16 clubs, you are talking a mind blowing amount of money, every single club would be looking at potentially billions a year.

How few of the English clubs are owned by paternalistic local businessmen? Do you think Roman will think twice about moving to somewhere that he can build a sexy stadium? The Glazers to somewhere that they are not hated? (I would use foreign examples, but I don't them well enough ) If Manchester United move to Shanghai what, exactly, are they representing?

[murf]

The money, or a significantly large part of it, will come from the large rich non-European markets like asia and the middle east. What the likes of local, match-going fans in Merseyside/Mancunia or London think will mean nothing let alone the fans of the other 86 teams and hundreds of non-league clubs. All outweighed financially by the armchair brigade be that armchair in Slough or Seoul.

In years to come we will get franchises hawked around far off countries taking some of the spots or causing bloated expansion.

Glad I lived early enough to appreciate the 70s and 80s (although ironically it was the low crowds of those days that led to revolution and the all seaters, armchairs, prawns and foreign sell outs).

[liquidfootball2]

I can't see it happening anytime soon tbh.

The disadvantages including international representative sanctions, so no national football for players from say Brazil, where this still represents the pinnacle of their personal ambition, far outweigh the immediate advantages which may not last too long or in effect be that secure for the majority.

The pay per view audiences in the UK are perhaps behind the rise of the premier league and have made it far more lucrative than other leagues.

The attraction is far greater for some stranded in leagues that no longer offer the competition or way to riches where they can then compete with the premier league, for them there is no obvious way out and this perhaps the golden alternative.

If TV interest soon fades as seems possible and the new league doesn't help subscription deals in the crucial UK market (or worldwide if it becomes uncompetitive for that matter) then not withstanding other countries taking its place, the risk for UK clubs taking part is all the greater.

With potentially no great attraction for worldwide tv audiences if it evolves into the majority of the games becoming worthless and futile as the strongest team(s) dominate there will be no way back.

The risk is far, far greater for oligarchs owning English based teams now. Whereas for Bayern, PSG etc they have nothing to lose and everything potentially to gain.

[blahblah]

Yep to both, assuming Tac sees the compulsiveness of the attraction, but I would guess more than 16 Clubs. 32 in 2 Conferences of 4 divisions of 4 clubs should do it.

These zillionaires aren't investing out of the goodness of their heart and a lil fun plaything: they like money and money attracts money.....

Edit: arguably this could be doubled with Each Conference having 2 Sub conferences, but the principle is the same.

[Tacalabala]

Yep to both, assuming Tac sees the compulsiveness of the attraction, but I would guess more than 16 Clubs. 32 in 2 Conferences of 4 divisions of 4 clubs should do it.

These zillionaires aren't investing out of the goodness of their heart and a lil fun plaything: they like money and money attracts money.....

Edit: arguably this could be doubled with Each Conference having 2 Sub conferences, but the principle is the same.

Bayern wanted the Champions League to be downsized to 24 clubs from the current 32. 16 is the optimum size to a) maximise profits for the participants, b) maintain a sense of competition.

[blahblah]

Yep to both, assuming Tac sees the compulsiveness of the attraction, but I would guess more than 16 Clubs. 32 in 2 Conferences of 4 divisions of 4 clubs should do it.

These zillionaires aren't investing out of the goodness of their heart and a lil fun plaything: they like money and money attracts money.....

Edit: arguably this could be doubled with Each Conference having 2 Sub conferences, but the principle is the same.

Bayern wanted the Champions League to be downsized to 24 clubs from the current 32. 16 is the optimum size to a) maximise profits for the participants, b) maintain a sense of competition.

But does that include domestic leagues? 16 wouldn't provide enough matches for blah's Global League

[Tacalabala]

Yep to both, assuming Tac sees the compulsiveness of the attraction, but I would guess more than 16 Clubs. 32 in 2 Conferences of 4 divisions of 4 clubs should do it.

These zillionaires aren't investing out of the goodness of their heart and a lil fun plaything: they like money and money attracts money.....

Edit: arguably this could be doubled with Each Conference having 2 Sub conferences, but the principle is the same.

Bayern wanted the Champions League to be downsized to 24 clubs from the current 32. 16 is the optimum size to a) maximise profits for the participants, b) maintain a sense of competition.

But does that include domestic leagues? 16 wouldn't provide enough matches for blah's Global League

This isn't about finding the best team in the world. It's barely about sport.

[blahblah]

Yep to both, assuming Tac sees the compulsiveness of the attraction, but I would guess more than 16 Clubs. 32 in 2 Conferences of 4 divisions of 4 clubs should do it.

These zillionaires aren't investing out of the goodness of their heart and a lil fun plaything: they like money and money attracts money.....

Edit: arguably this could be doubled with Each Conference having 2 Sub conferences, but the principle is the same.

Bayern wanted the Champions League to be downsized to 24 clubs from the current 32. 16 is the optimum size to a) maximise profits for the participants, b) maintain a sense of competition.

But does that include domestic leagues? 16 wouldn't provide enough matches for blah's Global League

This isn't about finding the best team in the world. It's barely about sport.

That's a minor problem, as there will be loads of hyperbolic analysis where every goal will be brilliant, out of this world etc or a tragic defensive mistake (whoops we already have that )

The only problem is where do the players come from, but the NFL draft type thing answers that too (not that I understand the full mechanics of it).

[liquidfootball2]

Taca said..

If you can imagine all the money for all the major leagues, including the Champions League, being concentrated into 16 clubs, you are talking a mind blowing amount of money, every single club would be looking at potentially billions a year.....

But that assumes far too much and is a scenario I just can't see happening.

A league needs to be competitive and have the underlying structure keeping it that way rather than not....as Forest hinted, with no real promotion or relegation an American style draft system might work if only that were possible. No college system underlying this makes it very difficult and likely FIFA sanctions on representing national teams may make it virtually impossible for some star players.

A stagnant league with the best teams soon dominating offers little prospect of being a healthy competition and keeping the crucial worldwide TV pay per view audiences happy and buying or renewing subscriptions, with no sustainable cash cow that bubble bursts and the whole enterprise collapses.

The idea is there and the potential also but its so very different in reality when some clubs can see every advantage and virtually none against and others have the absolute opposite of this.

Some will naturally want it far more than others, hence Bayern is reputed to be one of the loudest advocates.

It will happen eventually imo but not for a long time.

[murf]

Not sure how a draft system really works or is still allowed with human "rights". If a young American Handballer wants to live and play in New York how can a San Francisco team buy him and make him live there and play for them - akin to slavery!?

(Substitute football/Milan/Manchester etc and see how that plays in the days of agents/ Bosmans/ECHR)

[Tacalabala]

Not sure how a draft system really works or is still allowed with human "rights". If a young American Handballer wants to live and play in New York how can a San Francisco team buy him and make him live there and play for them - akin to slavery!?

(Substitute football/Milan/Manchester etc and see how that plays in the days of agents/ Bosmans/ECHR)

Yes, if you're fresh out of UCLA, and get drafted by New York Jets, you're going to the Jets, you have no say in it. If you then go on to live up to your potential, you're an asset in your own right and have some freedom about what happens to you, the very best players actually make a big song and dance of announcing where they'll be playing next.

The college system is awful, you're basically treated like a low paid grunt while the college takes all the money, albeit you get an education out of it probably. It's not something I'd want to see here.

I think we're over-rationalising it here, the clubs really can't see beyond the money. Bayern's president is Uli Hoeness, a convicted tax evader who was elected to the position after an election in which he was the only candidate.

[blahblah]

Not sure how a draft system really works or is still allowed with human "rights". If a young American Handballer wants to live and play in New York how can a San Francisco team buy him and make him live there and play for them - akin to slavery!?

(Substitute football/Milan/Manchester etc and see how that plays in the days of agents/ Bosmans/ECHR)

That could be part of the Brexit line re London Jags would be easier to do

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristidosh ... d2f0ea6e44
and
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristidosh ... 927b68b400

[blahblah]

I think we're over-rationalising it here, the clubs really can't see beyond the money. Bayern's president is Uli Hoeness, a convicted tax evader who was elected to the position after an election in which he was the only candidate.

Exactly, I doubt Hoeness is unique (convictions aside).

Also the revenue generated would be HUGE re overcoming obstacles, but as per the "other" debate: I would guess that the EU will have more clout in the negotiations with the Clubs' Organisation.

[forestfan]

Not sure how a draft system really works or is still allowed with human "rights". If a young American Handballer wants to live and play in New York how can a San Francisco team buy him and make him live there and play for them - akin to slavery!?

(Substitute football/Milan/Manchester etc and see how that plays in the days of agents/ Bosmans/ECHR)

Yes, if you're fresh out of UCLA, and get drafted by New York Jets, you're going to the Jets, you have no say in it. If you then go on to live up to your potential, you're an asset in your own right and have some freedom about what happens to you, the very best players actually make a big song and dance of announcing where they'll be playing next.

The college system is awful, you're basically treated like a low paid grunt while the college takes all the money, albeit you get an education out of it probably. It's not something I'd want to see here.

Nobody is forced to sign a contract in NFL. Some big names like John Elway and Eli Manning effectively forced trades by refusing to sign for the teams that drafted them (I think for footballing rather than geographical reasons - both teams were well-known QB graveyards at the time of said drafts, hence why they were picking first!)

As a drafting team, if you're sensible then you will find out if those on your shortlist want to play for you, and if there is an issue then you either pass or if they are clearly the best player available, arrange a suitable trade with a team who they are happy to go to.