Proposed League Reorganisation

Apologies if this is discussed on another thread.

What does everyone think of this?

Personally I think the existing “pyramid” system works. If it ain’t broke....... and all that. Seems like a money grab to me, and the idea of preferred clubs fills me with dread.

If they really want to help smaller clubs, why not pay a percentage of any transfers to smaller clubs rather than agents - players could help push this through. Even 1% of a £1 billion transfer window would be a lot of money to smaller clubs!


  • From the little I understand I hate it, think its a power grab for the bigger teams

    The only benefit is the 25% TV money being distributed to the football league....but why can't that be done with 20 teams and the system in place now?

    Don't like the playoff scenario for the 16th placed team

    And the 9 governing teams will have more power....even if we are one i still don't like get into the Prem you deserve to be part of the conversation whether you've been there for 100 years or 1

    Think its no coincidence that this is coming to the forefront after the big teams have found the early stages of the season hard going

    Think its harder for championship teams to be ambitious
  • edited October 2020

    And the 9 governing teams will have more power....even if we are one i still don't like it...

    But probably not one of the six that would vote for their best interests. We would be a pawn basically, we voted against this but there were six other teams, namely the "top" six, who voted themselves loads more money at the expense of the rest.

    It sort of stinks of Will Salthouse being made our director of football
  • The chosen 9 would be the ones voting on issues but a 2/3 result will be enough so the big 6 decide everything.
  • Of course, someone at West Ham decided we needed a bit of publicity
  • edited October 2020
    Only 7 Premier League teams - the Big Six plus Everton - support the proposals but all 72 Football League teams seem to like the idea.

    Hardly a surprise, League Two clubs would get £3.2m a year up from £900k and League One clubs £3.3m - £4.5m up from £1.2m. The Championship would receive a total of £568.8m with the top club getting £26.7m, up from £8.2m.

    The FA seems to be in favour, they'd get an extra £100m but they aren't happy with scrapping the Community Shield.
  • If the mancs and scousers want to reduce the number of prem teams to 18, I can make a suggestion to reduce the numbers. Absolutely no other changes needed.

    Bye bye greedy reds, and shut the door behind you.
  • The fact that all the EFL support it is interesting. That to me signals that maybe it’s not as bad as I first feared. I’m still very unsure about it all though
  • EFL clubs only support this because they face not existing as a club soon. Its very much financial blackmail.

  • But why can't they do that with 20 teams? That's what I don't understand

    Just filter the TV money down with the system in place, but the 9 governing teams can't be implemented
  • edited October 2020
    Because they need to spin it as less teams , scrapping community shield , scrapping League cup saves on average 10 - 12 games.

    This will then give clubs more pre-season friendlies in whichever country to plug themselves more to make more money or for an expanded Champions League (European Super League effectively)

    The clubs have said its about player welfare and reducing the number of games for a winter break to be added and less injuries, but that a straight up lie. Its literally to do the above ^.
  • There is no safeguards either that the top 6 out of 9 vote could effectively day 1 go like this:-

    "Revenue from the PL to be split 70% in favour of the top 6 sides"
    - all in favour
    "out voted 6 to 9"

    "West Ham new owners, Americans with more money than Man United"
    - all in favour
    "1 out of 9"

    Effectively you may never be able to sell your club without the say so of the big 6 and any money effectively will be controlled by 6 clubs.
  • Solely down to pound notes
  • edited October 2020
    Then you have the loan system which is literally stupid loaning 4 players to one team ? and loaning up to 15 players outside. Essentially the top 6 could do this.

    "Rotherham you will take our 4 players on loan and will play them all season"
    -We want to bring through our own players....
    "Sorry you need to do this you will effectively become our Chelsea B team"

    "Clubs who refuse to take in loan players from the top 6 to be financially penalised"
    - all in favour
    - "6 out of 9"

    Its honestly the most stupidest system i can think of. It is as many have put it Turkeys voting for Christmas.
  • arrogance in football, who would have thought =)
  • edited October 2020

    Then you have the loan system which is literally stupid loaning 4 players to one team ? and loaning up to 15 players outside. Essentially the top 6 could do this.

    "Rotherham you will take our 4 players on loan and will play them all season"
    -We want to bring through our own players....
    "Sorry you need to do this you will effectively become our Chelsea B team"

    In other countries the top clubs have B Teams playing in lower leagues. In 2011 and 2014 Barcelona B finished 3rd in the Segunda Division but were barred from promotion to La Liga because they're a reserve team. In 1980 Real Madrid beat their own reserve team Castilla in the final of the Copa Del Rey

    Big clubs loaning four players out to lower league teams doesn't seem as stupid as Liverpool B winning the Championship or Chelsea v Chelsea B in the FA Cup final.
  • I think the idea of loaning younger players to lower leagues is a good one, for experience, etc. However the idea that a rich club can loan out what seems to be unlimited players seems crazy.
    All the richer clubs seem to do is buy up the talent, which stops other teams buying them, so less competition and the big teams just get bigger/richer. They will not lend players to any team that may compete with them
  • I’d imagine FIFPRO would be very anti the changes if it meant that clubs used them for more friendlies. If they state that it’s for player welfare, I’d expect some rules to be drawn up about friendlies and stuff
  • I would agree with scrapping the league cup as the FA Cup is perfectly sufficient as an inter division and non league knock out contest. Should the three divisions outside the Premiership wish to retain it among themselves that could be decided by a vote.

    I am all in favour of greater amounts of money reaching the lower leagues.

    I can't possibly agree with weighted voting rights. Should it be 18 or 20 teams it must always be one team one vote.

    I think the big change could come within pay per view. A whole new model could arise in which each club is able to manage their own par per view and a percentage is paid to the Premier league or FA accordingly. This could make the existing model of Sky, BT etc a thing of the past. it does tend work in Boxing in which venues still get filled on account of the experience of actually attending being so different to watching on TV, but it does allow the clubs to monetise their product outside of gate receipts and TV deals with third parties. Teams who have an overseas fan base could really benefit, if able to secure the streams of course.
  • From what i have gathered the full proposal.

    Rescue Fund
    An immediate rescue fund of £350,000,000 to the English Football League and Football Association for lost revenues of 2019/20 and 2020/21

    For the EFL:

    £50,000,000 to cover 2019/20 EFL matchday losses;

    Up to £200,000,000 available to cover 2020/21 EFL matchday losses;

    Money will be advanced to the EFL from increased future revenues.

    For the FA:
    £100,000,000 in grants, made up of £55,000,000 to cover operational losses, £25,000,000 for clubs below the EFL, £10,000,000 for the Women’s Super League and Championship, £10,000,000 for grassroots

    Funds to be made available by the Premier League through loans guaranteed by the clubs.

    Infrastructure Plan
    Infrastructure funding of 6% of Premier League gross revenues to be distributed annually to the top four divisions.

    Each club will receive £100 per seat annually.

    Infrastructure funding can only be used for stadia and fan experiences.

    Fan Charter
    A cap of £20 on Premier League away ticketing (adjusted every 3 years for inflation)

    Subsidised Premier League away travel

    Safe-standing sections at the discretion of each club, subject to government permission.

    Away sections must provide at least 3,000 or 8% of capacity, whichever is higher.

    Annual Good Causes
    An increase of 66% in annual contributions to good causes in England.

    A total of 5% of Premier League gross income to be contributed annually to good causes and grassroots football, to include focus on combatting racism and discrimination.

    Redistribution of Media & Sponsorship Revenues (three possible options)
    Option A: 50% equal, 25% current-year merit, 25% previous 3-year merit
    A greater emphasis will be placed on merit in both the Premier League and the Championship with half of payments reflecting positions over the past four years.

    Option B: Current Premier League distribution scheme (50% equal, 25% by merit and 25% by facility fees) but newly promoted clubs must holdback £25m of first two years in the Premier League to mitigate risk of relegation.

    Option C: Current Premier League distribution scheme, but newly promoted clubs receive 25% of their allocated Facility Fees for first 3 years in league.

    For all above options:
    Excluding parachute payments and including new infrastructure payments, solidarity from the Premier League to the English Football League would increase from 4% to 25%.

    Premier League and English Football League domestic and international media rights will be collectively sold by the Premier League.

    Compensation payments to The EFL and FA, infrastructure monies and related borrowings are deducted prior to determination of distributable revenues.

    Pyramid structure
    The Premier League, originally formed to house 18 clubs,would be reduced from 20 to 18 clubs.

    This would free up the calendar and, with fewer teams and an end to parachute payments, provide additional resources to the EFL.

    Reduction from 38 to 34 rounds of matches will also aid the national team.

    Championships, League One and League Two to all be made up of 24 clubs

    Promotion and relegation
    Premier League relegation. At least 2 clubs automatically relegated annually

    Championship promotion: 1st and 2nd automatically promoted.

    Club finishing 16th in the Premier League joins four team Championship play-off tournament with teams who finish 3rd, 4th and 5th. Semi-finals would be 16th place PL team vs 5th place Championships team nad 3rd place Championship team against 4th place Championship team.

    Championship relegation – 3 clubs

    Leagues One and Two: promotion of 3 clubs. Relegation of 4 clubs

    Club media
    All Premier League clubs have the exclusive rights to sell eight live matches a season directly to fans via their own digital platforms in all international territories.

    All Premier League and Championship clubs allowed to show limited in-match highlights on their own digital platforms.

    No more than 27 games per club will be shown live in UK per season

    Saturday 3pm broadcast blackouts remain to help protect EFL attendance

    Other competitions
    League Cup and Community Shield discontinued;

    Establishment of a new independent league for the Women’s professional game, not to be owned by the Premier League or The Football Association;

    FA Cup replays retained but there will be no replays in the winter break;

    Premier League begins later in August and pre-season friendlies extended;

    No more than two weeks between the end of the Premier League and the Champions League final;

    Premier League clubs must participate at least once every five years in the Premier League summer tournament.

    Other structural changes
    Elite Player Performance Plan funding is included in the revenue received by EFL clubs;

    Clubs in League One and below are no longer required to have an academy;

    Clubs permitted to have up to 15 players out on loan domestically at any time, including up to four in a single English club. Introduction of one month loans for players under 23, an ability to recall loanees in the event of managerial change, incentivise loanee clubs through payments based on future performance or sale of loaned players;

    Remove the scholarship clause permitting players to terminate at any stage.

    Cost Controls & Related Party Income
    Financial Fair Play rules that align with Uefa to ensure English clubs are not at a disadvantage in Europe;

    A £50 million cap per annum on all related party transactions and a more stringent ‘related party’ definition;

    Premier League executive provided with full access to clubs accounting information to investigate cost control

    A joint Premier League and Championship body will monitor cost controls.

    The English Football League will introduce hard salary caps.

    All material matters relating to the business of the Premier League will require shareholder approval, except that the Board will decide whether to approve a new owner;

    All votes will require more than two-thirds majority to be approved;

    All other votes for the operation of the Premier League will be one-club, one-vote except those provided for under ‘Special Voting Rights’

    Special Voting Rights
    Each of the nine clubs who, at any time of determination, have been members of the Premier League continuously for more seasons than other clubs will be considered a ‘Long-Term Shareholder’.

    Two-thirds of the long-term shareholders can cause to be adopted without approval from the other clubs:

    i) the election or removal of the CEO and/or a member of the board;

    ii) amendments to cost control rules and regulations;

    iii) contracts for the sale of league broadcasting and media rights

    Two-thirds of the long-term shareholders can prevent from being adopted resolutions to:
    i) change the distribution rights of the sponsorship, commercial and broadcasting rights sold centrally;

    ii) change the distribution to clubs from other PL centralised rights or assets

    c) alter in a material way the nature of the competition

    Two-thirds of the long-term shareholders can veto the Premier League board’s approval of a proposed new owner.
  • Thanks Yeold.
    Some good ideas, but I still think that it is still a power/money grab by the “big six”.

    They seem to be taking advantage of the smaller clubs who need the cash now, but IMO they shouldn’t have to destroy grass roots football in this country which has been in place for over 100 years.
  • Very thorough Yeold :+1:

    Lots of good in there, some questionable stuff, and particularly I don’t think the motives are clear
  • I don't see why the good stuff for the Football League can't be used and we throw away changing the Premier League structure.
  • Definite power grab with a cash bribe. Some of the ideas are perfectly good and reasonable but why the need to secure the ability to wield so much future power for nine clubs over the rest of football.
  • Honestly I would be happy with all of the changes coming in with the exception of the top 6 having the power in the votes.
  • Definite power grab with a cash bribe. Some of the ideas are perfectly good and reasonable but why the need to secure the ability to wield so much future power for nine clubs over the rest of football.

    It's not even 9 though, is it? It's a two thirds majority of those 9, so the top 6 would have the ability to make any future changes they wanted. I'm sure the lower leagues are thrilled as there's loads more money in it for them, and, in all fairness, a good few of them have very little chance of playing in the Premier League in the next 10 or more years, so why do they care?

    This must not be allowed to go through as is.
  • Its just too skewed in their favour

    And as Ian Holloway, its like they have a gun to the heads of the EFL

    Its almost like they are saying "either let us have this power or you are going to go bust"
  • No coincidence that the two leading this and to a lesser extent Arsenal are all American owned. They couldn’t give a monkeys about the PL, football and the fan base, it’s all about control and making money.
  • Funny, that is what GSB are accused of and yet they oppose it. How odd.
  • Not really, its easy to oppose for them if they want to sell the club for say half a billion it will need someone with ALOT of cash to come in. If the top 6 can reject owners and most likely would reject potential new owners on the basis of wealth there is no way a top 6 club would ever approve of a sale to anyone who could afford that.
Sign In or Register to comment.