Two of the club's that engineered the breakaway which became the Premier League, are at it again. They offer some good proposals but behind it they really intend to put control of football in to the hands of themselves and a few other clubs. Greed! 

 

From The Athletic:

"On Sunday, the question of who exactly the authored the document remained in question but it has been worked on for up to three years by Joel Glazer, the co-owner of Manchester United, along with John W Henry, Liverpool’s lead investor. The Athletic also understands that Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck has been heavily involved in discussions for quite some time. Liverpool and United formally presented the proposals to their top-six rivals Tottenham, Arsenal and Manchester City on Thursday, intending to continue discussions over the weekend. Different sources attributed each of Henry, Glazer, Parry and United’s executive vice-chairman Ed Woodward with the credit for writing sections of the document but it was difficult to establish anyone prepared to take ultimate responsibility..."

 

 

Have a read of Martin Samuels article who doesn't pull his punches.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8829033/amp/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Liverpool-Man-Uniteds-Project-Big-Picture-disgusting-Big-Six-power-grab.html

Take it as a starting point in negotiations. More in there to support the lower leagues than has ever been put forward by the Premier League, EFL etc. etc. 

Greedy Bastards.

I'll pass on the Samuels article, a dick if ever there was one.

People hate change, wait and see what comes out of the final paper. Cutting back a couple of compititions maybe good for the players not playing so many games.

Liverpool and United proposal. Both owned by Americans. Coincidence?

Agree With earlier poster it's a point to start negotiating.  25% to the lower lgs is not to be sneezed at and will secure it's future... Stop this yo yo non sense. Conn.. normally not far of the mark agrees ...ish. https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/oct/11/plan-to-mend-the-great-crack-in-football-pyramid-should-not-be-swept-off-the-table

Moral outrage from City fans ????,  yet never in the history of English football has there been a proposal to give 25% of future TV rights to the EFL profit and 250M immediately to every EFL club. 

 

Inevitably the bigger clubs will sway more power either way, at least this is giving something back to ensures the game is preserved at all levels. 

 

 

4 hours ago, mrbojangles said:

Liverpool and United proposal. Both owned by Americans. Coincidence?

Of course not, they've been spit balling at the White House with Trump on the best way to covertly take over Europe. 

45 minutes ago, BangrakBob said:

Moral outrage from City fans

They're only upset cos the League Cup will be cancelled????

Project Big Picture. A new proposal to reshape English football. Manchester United and Liverpool owners have been in talks for years regarding these changes. But what exactly is it? I'm here with another IMO to talk you through all the major points and I will also be discussing my verdict on Project Big Picture.

You need to listen to this guy he does a good job explaining 

 

 

Is this heading towards a European Super league?

4 minutes ago, ChipButty said:

Is this heading towards a European Super league?

Made some very good points, as always, I am a subscriber but hadn't seen this vlog.

 

Have to disagree on his views on the League Cup. I've always seen it as taking something away from the prestige of the FA cup. All his arguments for the LC are covered by the FA cup plus some. It gives the opportunity of non league clubs, the real miinows, of actually getting a competitive game against the likes of Manchester United at Old Trafford. Something the league cup doesn't do. Now its just a distraction/practice match for the big clubs. Get rid.

 

The big worry is the proposal for the big 6 to effectively take control of the league. it will end in tears and could be a way into the formation of a European super league.

It's a blatant attempt at a power grab with a bribe attached, pure and simple. To try and give majority voting rights to the big 6, is just so wrong on every level. I could go on but hopefully this won't see any advancement on just being an idea. Somehow though, I feel this is an opening salvo so that the next "idea" won't seem so bad

13 minutes ago, polpott said:

The big worry is the proposal for the big 6 to effectively take control of the league. it will end in tears and could be a way into the formation of a European super league.

I think Im against that, need to listen to more from others 

5 hours ago, wilai said:

They're only upset cos the League Cup will be cancelled????

 

Do you think it's right that the big 6 will effectively have control of the league? They would be able to veto any newcomers or new owners. Nah, it's not right mate

5 hours ago, BangrakBob said:

Of course not, they've been spit balling at the White House with Trump on the best way to covertly take over Europe. 

 

They want to turn the Prem into an NFL style competition. Have a read of the full idea or have a listen to the video that CHipbutty has posted. The lad is a United fan but speaks a lot of sense.

I know the Daily Mail is not the most reliable source in the world it will do for now

 

REVEALED: Liverpool and Manchester United owners hold crisis talks in bid to keep Project Big Picture alive ahead of emergency Premier League meeting this week - with EIGHT clubs against idea

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8832777/Liverpool-Manchester-United-remain-determined-ahead-Project-Big-Picture.html

The devil will be in the details and while the proposals provide a way for the 'top 6' to get even more power, there is a lot to like in these plans - particularly on how revenue is distributed throughout the football leagues. 

 

Positives:

 

- Scrapping parachute payments

- Scrapping the league cup

- Scrapping the Charity Shield

- Cutting PL to 18 teams - (It used to be 22 teams when it launched)

- Finances more fairly distributed to football and non-league clubs.

- More money for grassroots football.

 

Negative

 

- changes to the play offs from the championship

- changes to relegation from the PL (team finished 16th would enter Championship play offs)

- more power for 'top 6' 

 

 

Another point regarding the League Cup - that tournament was only created following the introduction of flood lights into stadiums, with chairmen wanting a way for clubs to play more night matches in order to help pay for the cost of the floodlights! Apart from the final, teams seldom take it seriously anyway, with most PL teams, and a fair few Championship teams, most fielding reserve sides anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thought it best to merge the 2 threads. Hope the 2 ops (Bred and Chippy) don't mind

Project Big Picture EXPLAINED: All you need to know about Big Six's scheme to shake up English football - including what it means for the fans, who the big winners are... and how the FA can VETO the breakaway

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8830415/Project-Big-Picture-explained-Premier-League-Big-Sixs-plans.html

Just now, mrbojangles said:

Thought it best to merge the 2 threads. Hope the 2 ops (Bred and Chippy) don't mind

Ok with me 

59 minutes ago, mrbojangles said:

 

Do you think it's right that the big 6 will effectively have control of the league? They would be able to veto any newcomers or new owners. Nah, it's not right mate

Agree that the 'Big Six' should not control the league but I do think the voting system needs changing. The two thirds majority rule makes it extremely difficult for anything remotely controversial (eg: reducing number of teams) to be adopted. Although it will give the 'Big Six' a little more power, maybe the compromise should be a reduction to 51% from the current 66% meaning a reduction from 14 votes to 11 required to pass any proposed amendments. 

 

A lot of the rest of the suggestions are decent and anything that can help teams in lower divisions should be welcomed. It's a bit of a pity that the furore over voting has taken 'Centre Stage' in the media with the rest of the proposals taking a back seat.

 

 

I'm not really in favour of giving the Big 6 all the power. You'd need checks and balances and total transparency in the decision-making, which might be an improvement even, but at least they've got some ideas for looking after the game that the PL and the FA are incapable of implementing.

If they don't get what they want, maybe they'll start looking at a European Super League, which would be a disaster. 

8 hours ago, BangrakBob said:

Moral outrage from City fans ????

This has nothing to with being a City fan (me) or fan of any club, it has nothing to do with club tribalism!

 

There are some decent proposals in Parry's and the American owners of Liverpool and ManU document, and they should be further explored, but the timing of this (in the making for quite some time - version 17 apparently of the document), the makeup of people behind it and the attempted power grab of only *2/3rds of 9 PL clubs being required to basically rewrite top level football in England FOR THEIR OWN GOOD absolutely stinks and should be opposed.

 

*So ManU and Liverpool would only need 4 other clubs on their side to rule football. We can assume 2 of those would be Arsenal and Spurs. I would guess Chelsea as Buck has been involved in the drafting. That leaves only one more from Everton, City, WHU and Soton - can't see the latter two being 'invited' in to the gang, nor City whos threat to the traditional big 5 has been opposed by them for the past 12 years.

 

4 hours ago, wilai said:

Although it will give the 'Big Six' a little more power

The big 6 should individually and as a group

have no more power than the other PL clubs individually and as a group...one club, one vote.

 

The above is a part of original post and used to insinuate that bigger clubs may have more than one vote each. This was clearly not the intention of that original post which is now copied below.

 

'Agree that the 'Big Six' should not control the league but I do think the voting system needs changing. The two thirds majority rule makes it extremely difficult for anything remotely controversial (eg: reducing number of teams) to be adopted. Although it will give the 'Big Six' a little more power, maybe the compromise should be a reduction to 51% from the current 66% meaning a reduction from 14 votes to 11 required to pass any proposed amendments.'

 

1 hour ago, wilai said:

 

A lot of the rest of the suggestions are decent and anything that can help teams in lower divisions should be welcomed. It's a bit of a pity that the furore over voting has taken 'Centre Stage' in the media with the rest of the proposals taking a back seat.

I agree with you about there's a lot of decent proposals. The PL clubs should now be 'pressured' in to the viable ones. But the BIG PICTURE, which fully deserves taking centre stage, IS the attempted power grab.

 

With covid restrictions, with fans being kept out of stadiums, with fans being charged 15 quid to watch one game on tv, there is a lot of upset in the UK for fans who attend football, some talking about not returning to watch games or following cheaper nonleague football. The American owners of Liverpool and Man United don't care that much about the regular fans though do they, they have huge fan bases overseas: as reflectrd in the proposal to be able to sell so many games themselves per season 

 

 

 

 

30 minutes ago, Bredbury Blue said:

This has nothing to with being a City fan (me) or fan of any club, it has nothing to do with club tribalism!

 

There are some decent proposals in Parry's and the American owners of Liverpool and ManU document, and they should be further explored, but the timing of this (in the making for quite some time - version 17 apparently of the document), the makeup of people behind it and the attempted power grab of only *2/3rds of 9 PL clubs being required to basically rewrite top level football in England FOR THEIR OWN GOOD absolutely stinks and should be opposed.

 

*So ManU and Liverpool would only need 4 other clubs on their side to rule football. We can assume 2 of those would be Arsenal and Spurs. I would guess Chelsea as Buck has been involved in the drafting. That leaves only one more from Everton, City, WHU and Soton - can't see the latter two being 'invited' in to the gang, nor City whos threat to the traditional big 5 has been opposed by them for the past 12 years.

 

City dont have the fan base to qualify

18 minutes ago, ChipButty said:

City dont have the fan base to qualify

I was hoping we'd keep the club tribalism out of this, but as you insist, based on the last full pre-covid season City's average home attendance was the 5th highest behind ManU, Arsenal, WHU and Spurs, and based on Twitter followers (believe this is a measure used these days) City were 5th behind ManU, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool. Not bad for liccle City.

 

But let's try and keep it to the BIG Stitch-up, sorry Big Picture, shall we.

1 hour ago, Bredbury Blue said:

The big 6 should individually and as a group

have no more power than the other PL clubs individually and as a group...one club, one vote.

 

Can you show me where I said they should have additional votes?.....What I said was that the Big Six would benefit from the reduction in votes required to pass a proposal. Please don't use a part of a quote and change it's context...Thank you.