Liverpool and United plan shake up of Premier League

From The Telegraph: summary of Project Big Picture. Sorry such a lengthy post.

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 two clubs automatically relegated annually

Championship promotion: 1st and 2nd automatically promoted.

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

Championship: Relegation of three clubs

League One: Promotion of three clubs. Relegation of four clubs

League Two: Promotion of four clubs. Relegation of four 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;

No restrictions on loans in;

Player contracts: Lump sums permitted to be payable from the start of employment.  Force majeure provisions to be added to protect against clubs' insolvency.

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.

Governance
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.

This is essentially that the 'big six' want to control their own media revenues and sell their own games directly to their own fans.

Lot more money for United, Liverpool etc, slightly more money short term for the non-PL clubs and it will be paid for by the bottom 14 clubs in the Premier League.

At the minute, money is redistributed relatively evenly throughout the Premier League but these changes will make it far more like La Liga where Barcelona and Madrid's earnings are huge multiples of the rest.

Wish we didn’t have our prints all over this.

Another scheme to make the rich richer, with a veiled
Attempt to make it seem like all the lower leagues and grass roots will benefit, but in the long term they clearly won’t.
Bin it!

If they want to help anyone but themselves, stop paying players obscene amounts of money, lower the ticket prices and the outrageous cost of merchandise, i.e. shirts.

Very very unfair, same old adage, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. I'm against it but as I'm classed at poorer they don't give a dam. Basically benefits half a dozen clubs or so whereas the majority can get fu**ed over.

Goes completely against what the City of Liverpool stands for, absolutely shameful

Ill need to read it in more detail but off the bat I see plus and negatives

Example why should a club like say WBA who come up for a season then go back down, up down like a yoyo have an equal say in issues to say ourselves or utd?

Flip side is how is it fair that 6 to 9 clubs have all the power, they will never allow anything change that might have an impact on them...

Like I say more reading on it needed some pros some cons to it but overall is this dangerous ground?

The rescue package should've been put on the table without the power grab. I'd say it's the top 6 having total control is the biggest objection. To clarify that - It's actually the 9 clubs with the longest serving Premier league clubs.

Namely...........Man.U. Man.C. LFC, Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs, Everton, Soton and West Ham. The proposal is on that front to get RID of the 14 vote threshold for a vote to pass. Under the Big Picture it will need 6 out of the top 9 to get a proposal passed.

It's obviously an opportunistic power grab. No doubt the wealth of the game is disproportionately dominated by the Premier League. This BP does try to address that but it's the power grab element of the deal that most object to.

Not sure how this will ever get approved as it will amount to clubs agreeing to give up any power they have to a few of the top clubs.

That said, let's not pretend that every club, whether at the top or the bottom, will make decisions based solely on their own best interest. This showed with the discussions about what to do about the league during Covid. Some clubs wanted to just freeze the standings, some wanted null and void, some wanted to see it finished, etc....


And as someone said up above, why should a club that has no real investment in the Premier League save a season or two here or there have the same kind of voting power as a club that contributes heavily to the overall amount of revenue that is being re-distributed.

Yes, we make a ton of money (as does United) but we spend a ton to bring in all that money, then it's redistributed to clubs that aren't doing anything to contribute or even worse, are being run poorly or financially mismanaged?

There needs to be something done, but I doubt this proposal in its current form is going to be what happens. Probably a lot more compromise is going to need to be made.

It will get approved with tweaks I reckon.

Lower league clubs are desperate just now, so compromises will happen, but they need the money now.

The top 6 having too much voting power is not so cool, some of the rest of it makes sense, (e.g. £20 for away day tickets)

Very very unfair, same old adage, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. I'm against it but as I'm classed at poorer they don't give a dam. Basically benefits half a dozen clubs or so whereas the majority can get fu**ed over.

If the big clubs want to see the clubs below the Premiership get screwed over, as you say, all they have to do is nothing. Those smaller clubs will be dropping like flies in the coming 2-3 years if something forward-thinking isn't done. The fact that the main drivers of the economic engine are gaining more control over the finances of the deal shouldn't be some shocker. It's reality.

If people read the details (and it's a long OP,  I know), the plan for distributing the wealth is far more socialistic and benevolent than anything happening now.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/oct/12/project-big-pictures-offer-to-efl-clubs-you-will-be-looked-after-and-know-your-place

One notable excerpt from this Jonathan Liew article:

Disraeli deplores the widening gap between rich and poor. He chides the avarice of the ruling class and the thoughtless worship of wealth. He declares: “Power has only one duty – to secure the social welfare of the PEOPLE.”

This isn’t the slash-and-burn conservatism of Thatcher or the early industrialists. It is moderate, enlightened, pragmatic, and yet still utterly in thrall to old power and old money. And reading through the detail of Project Big Picture, the audacious power grab authored by the owners of Liverpool and Manchester United, it was impossible not to be struck by common threads.

In a way, the proposals leaked to the Telegraph over the weekend were the epitome of sporting paternalism: a generous redistribution of wealth, enforced by a startling consolidation of power. At a stroke, it would secure the financial future of the English league pyramid while rigidly strengthening existing hierarchies.

The implicit message to England’s smaller clubs: yes, we’re all in this together, you will be looked after. You can exist in dignity and comfort. But you will also know your place. It is the equivalent of giving a drowning man a lifejacket in exchange for his right to vote."

It’s another nail in the coffin of the beautiful game.
It’s all about money. If this happens then there will be no way back. It will basically be the big 6 club where other teams are invited to make up the number.

But to actually reduce the league so they can fit in more money making pre season friendly tours is sickening.

I think I’d rather have 40 teams in the premier league, play each other once at a neutral venue and every team splits all tv money equally. Yes it would mean only anfield being our home in cup and European competition but I’d rather that than this other monstrosity of an idea. At least it would be more fair.

But money will talk.

It’s another nail in the coffin of the beautiful game.
It’s all about money. If this happens then there will be no way back. It will basically be the big 6 club where other teams are invited to make up the number.

But to actually reduce the league so they can fit in more money making pre season friendly tours is sickening.

I think I’d rather have 40 teams in the premier league, play each other once at a neutral venue and every team splits all tv money equally. Yes it would mean only anfield being our home in cup and European competition but I’d rather that than this other monstrosity of an idea. At least it would be more fair.

But money will talk.

Meanwhile many of those clubs for whom you are concerned about fairness are wondering how they are going to keep afloat beyond Christmas.

The world I think many who reflexively dismiss this are pining for - it doesn't exist anymore. It just doesn't.

Meanwhile many of those clubs for whom you are concerned about fairness are wondering how they are going to keep afloat beyond Christmas.

The world I think many who reflexively dismiss this are pining for - it doesn't exist anymore. It just doesn't.

No it doesn’t. But to suggest that little clubs can only exist if the Big 6 become all powerful is wrong. There is enough money in the premier league to distribute it without the need to give more privelage to the already entitled clubs.
There is a reason why mike Ashley and such don’t want to part easily with their money cow. It’s greed.

It doesn't sit well with me either but at the very least there is something seemingly being done, the EPL are sitting with their fingers up their Arses doing F**k all, not to mention that useless kunt Taylor of the PFA, he's happy raking in his millions each year for doing very little for those players struggling in the lower leagues,

In my mind this is the big 6(9) weilding the axe, their intentions seem good but to what or who's end,it reminds me of how capitalism favours the rich, where something like only 11% own 79% of the wealth,

A lot needs to be ironed out first before it's approved and I'm not sure it will hold us in a good light, I'm not enamoured that FSG are having a big say in this....my question is....what's in it for them ? Their business men after all and they don't shake the hornets nest for no reason,  or is it that this fella Billy Beane wants more than just a share of FSG ?

Bit of a coincidence,  No ?


                                       YNWA

No it doesn’t. But to suggest that little clubs can only exist if the Big 6 become all powerful is wrong. There is enough money in the premier league to distribute it without the need to give more privelage to the already entitled clubs.
There is a reason why mike Ashley and such don’t want to part easily with their money cow. It’s greed.

Greed will be around with or without this proposal.

It doesn't sit well with me either but at the very least there is something seemingly being done, the EPL are sitting with their fingers up their Arses doing f**k all, not to mention that useless kunt Taylor of the PFA, he's happy raking in his millions each year for doing very little for those players struggling in the lower leagues,

In my mind this is the big 6(9) weilding the axe, their intentions seem good but to what or who's end,it reminds me of how capitalism favours the rich, where something like only 11% own 79% of the wealth,

A lot needs to be ironed out first before it's approved and I'm not sure it will hold us in a good light, I'm not enamoured that FSG are having a big say in this....my question is....what's in it for them ? Their business men after all and they don't shake the hornets nest for no reason,  or is it that this fella Billy Beane wants more than just a share of FSG ?

Bit of a coincidence,  No ?


                                       YNWA

I think it's in the big 6 interest to have a healthy platform from which to do their thing. That includes the rest of English football, not just the Premier League teams. Note the bit about expanded loans, no limit on how many loans in an EFL team can make, those all can be very helpful to the top teams in developing players (for keeping AND for selling). So sure, there is self-interest in this, but that doesn't make it exclusive to genuinely helping the lower leagues by giving them cash short term as well as giving them a more viable setup to do alright going forward.

https://twitter.com/benthetim/status/1315678764504883200?s=21

https://twitter.com/benthetim/status/1315678764504883200?s=21

If the club were to realize the potential commercial and media revenue through these deals plus the investment, it could easily switch ticketing policy to where every seat is affordable to all, not diverted to brokers and corporate tours, etc.  The money from the other would dwarf match day revenue.

I doubt they would do this, but they could.

Even when they come to America for preseason it about breaks my wallet just to get a regular ticket.

Goes completely against what the City of Liverpool stands for, absolutely shameful

Exactly, I'm not from Liverpool but I have been supporting this team from the age of 5 due to my father. Everyone know that the city represented the working class and even Manchester was too.

We need to distribute the money fairly depending on your final position.

Bit of old school american capitalism isnt it really?

Put their hat in the ring for sure. The stumbling block will be the top 6 effectively having full control. They will obviously manipulate the market to screw as much revenue as possible out of it. TV revenue will be of vital importance. Pay per view as well.

The £14.95 pay per view was the Premier leagues idea, not Sky's. So clearly that was testing the waters. Wasn't well recieved but again that was price conditioning. e.g. ask for £50 then let them have it for £29.95...think their getting a good deal.

They will tinker with the control aspect untill it's acceptable to the likes of West Ham. If it doesn't happen it still strengthens their hand with regard to future deals.

Bound to happen, Yanks will push for more control, milk the game..."Lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas"

Bit of old school american capitalism isnt it really?

Depends if you are meaning a caricature of American capitalism (Greed + Nothing = Greed) or a combination of thoughtfulness with economic prosperity, resulting in that motto I mentioned before: “Power has only one duty – to secure the social welfare of the PEOPLE.”

Every business is trying to generate revenue from the buying decisions of others. What someone does with that earned money is the bigger question.

How far do the open pockets go?

LFC could surely have a more modest training ground and help another (lower team) build up their own modest training ground? Should Man United help pay for a stadium expansion for Norwich?

How about transfers, maybe they should be subsidized as well?

Apart from Anfield, isn’t the next best live match experience over here? I’ve always enjoyed everybody’s live match company.

No surprise that our owners are the ones driving this forward.

Basically the root of the opposition to these ideas from the English footballing world (which has done Jack Squat to address a  very real crisis in their game) comes down to "Right. Just give us your money."

The RedBall move might signal more of a move toward an enhanced or infused Champions League, including weekend fixtures the way UEFA have been angling.

Over these past few days by the way, the other Big Six owners (especially Man United's) are being total cowards.

Where there is no vision, the people perish.

First, this stinks of capitalist America, and looking at the over sponsored and advertising ridden leagues on the other side of the pond is not an approach the most followed league in the world should be looking to replicate.
Secondly there are some very good proposals in here, and I don’t think they needs to be interdependent on other recommendations. Each club in the EPL should get a vote, with no weighting’s being applied, no brainer.  There should be a longer preseason, allowing bigger clubs to generate more revenue with their own tv rights/custom friendly tournaments/tours etc. Club level broadcast rights is a huge can of worms.
The big non talking point in this whole proposal is reducing the fixture list sold as to benefit the national team, but opening the way forward for a European super league which has been a pipe dream for so many years. Obviously this would then detract from EPL revenues which are now so kindly being distributed with lower league clubs.
There needs to be a big shake up to maintain the pyramid and I’m glad that at least some proposals are being floated for consideration, but this full recommendation is not the right path and a kick in the teeth to clubs on the brink of holding out over the course of this season without ticket revenue.

Not liking our name associated with this at all.

Not liking our name associated with this at all.

Worse it's not an association more like our brainchild.

Am I missing some info?

. EFL to get massive payout, saving some clubs

. Prem league reduced to 18 teams to ease fixture congestion

. League cup scrapped

. Less voting righrs for clubs with less time in prem league then others

On 1st point, surely that cant be a bad thing?

Point 2 not a bsd thing. Clubs like west ham wont go for it through fear of being the ones to lose out on being in the league

Point 3 I dont mind the league cup and its a good way to get game time for developing players or fringe players.

Point 4...why should yo yo clubs like Fulham and West Brom for example have the same say as other clubs in the affairs of the league, they likely wont be there next year, replaced by Norwich, wholl come up have an equal say then be gone rellaced by west brom or Fulham and so on

Whats the real negative to this that im obviously missing? Is it a tv deal issue?

First, this stinks of capitalist America, and looking at the over sponsored and advertising ridden leagues on the other side of the pond is not an approach the most followed league in the world should be looking to replicate.
Secondly there are some very good proposals in here, and I don’t think they needs to be interdependent on other recommendations. Each club in the EPL should get a vote, with no weighting’s being applied, no brainer.  There should be a longer preseason, allowing bigger clubs to generate more revenue with their own tv rights/custom friendly tournaments/tours etc. Club level broadcast rights is a huge can of worms.
The big non talking point in this whole proposal is reducing the fixture list sold as to benefit the national team, but opening the way forward for a European super league which has been a pipe dream for so many years. Obviously this would then detract from EPL revenues which are now so kindly being distributed with lower league clubs.
There needs to be a big shake up to maintain the pyramid and I’m glad that at least some proposals are being floated for consideration, but this full recommendation is not the right path and a kick in the teeth to clubs on the brink of holding out over the course of this season without ticket revenue.

The money for the lower leagues will obviously be a lifeline. Some may call it a bribe. Think the big 6 having a controlling vote will be an issue. The Premier League must've known about this. They should've made more of an effort to put in place a package for the lower leagues. They have allowed the big 6 to steal a march on the issue.

At least the big 6 have revealed their hand. But where does that leave Div 1 & Div 2. Some are on the brink. The big 6 have their price...and the price is control.

Am I missing some info?

. EFL to get massive payout, saving some clubs

. Prem league reduced to 18 teams to ease fixture congestion

. League cup scrapped

. Less voting righrs for clubs with less time in prem league then others

On 1st point, surely that cant be a bad thing?

Point 2 not a bsd thing. Clubs like west ham wont go for it through fear of being the ones to lose out on being in the league

Point 3 I dont mind the league cup and its a good way to get game time for developing players or fringe players.

Point 4...why should yo yo clubs like Fulham and West Brom for example have the same say as other clubs in the affairs of the league, they likely wont be there next year, replaced by Norwich, wholl come up have an equal say then be gone rellaced by west brom or Fulham and so on

Whats the real negative to this that im obviously missing? Is it a tv deal issue?

The issue is control. They want to buy Football. They are prepared to share some of the spoils but they want full control.  Football is about to be privatised much more than ever. This is a dangerous move.

Who knows what FSG or the Glaziers really think about football. Have you seen anything on line or anywhere else about their full proposal or their intentions. Their PR is crap.The fans should be having a say in this but the Big 6 haven't even bothered to consult fans..far as I know anyway.

Put their hat in the ring for sure. The stumbling block will be the top 6 effectively having full control. They will obviously manipulate the market to screw as much revenue as possible out of it. TV revenue will be of vital importance. Pay per view as well.

The £14.95 pay per view was the Premier leagues idea, not Sky's. So clearly that was testing the waters. Wasn't well recieved but again that was price conditioning. e.g. ask for £50 then let them have it for £29.95...think their getting a good deal.

They will tinker with the control aspect untill it's acceptable to the likes of West Ham. If it doesn't happen it still strengthens their hand with regard to future deals.

Bound to happen, Yanks will push for more control, milk the game..."Lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas"

From a LFC pov, there are a lot of positive developments in the proposals. Scrapping a competition and pre season game that nobody wants, a windfall for the lower league clubs who need it, the opportunity for this club to sell our own TV rights of unfashionable games that suit us, fewer league games needed to win a league, and an easier vote process for clubs like us to push through changes that work best for us, rather than other clubs. So as a club, we stand to gain a lot if the proposals go through. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas, so I don't think they will go through without tweaks to bits and pieces. But change shouldn't be automatically resisted, just because it's change. When you hear lower league clubs saying they're just weeks away from liquidation, they now have a choice. Accept the package on offer and stay afloat, or be left to sink or swim.

The real issues I see are that the money men including our owners are driving another nail into the coffin of football fans nationwide,  they don't understand football's origin as a working class sport for working class people,  they are not interested that your great grandpa lifted you over the turnstiles back in the day no matter which club you support,

Money is what the want and they don't give a flying F**k who falls by the wayside as long as they make their profits,
At the end of the day the most important assets are the fans, if fans don't go to any given ground, or don't pay any particular subscription fee the money men are fu**ed,

All football club's fans both from the EFL & EPL should band together and demand what we want, at the moment the tail is wagging the dog,

The money men want total control as far as I can tell, and again that includes our Avaricious lot, who it has to be said are going against the very fabric of what our club is about,  now there are some good points raised in their plan but like what most are alluding to, it's a total power grab, and that just isn't right.


                                        YNWA

Unadulterated greed.Nothing more to add & it’s a shame our owners are part of the leading pack.

Liverpool and Manchester United have been forced into an embarrassing climbdown over their push to reform English football after a tense meeting of the Premier League’s 20 clubs on Wednesday.

Together with the EFL chairman, Rick Parry, Liverpool and United have pushed Project Big Picture – a plan that proposed a £250m bailout for the EFL and a more equitable share of the game’s broadcast money in exchange for the Premier League’s big six clubs being granted overwhelming voting control on a number of important points.
David Bernstein to call for independent regulation in fight over football's future
Read more

The idea has divided the top division, with the 14 other clubs believed to be strongly against the change in governance – with the league and the Football Association sharing their view. At Wednesday’s virtual conference call, the Premier League chairman, Gary Hoffman, called for unity after an unedifying week and the Everton chief executive, Denise Barrett-Baxendale, demanded an apology from Liverpool and United, who were represented by Tom Werner and Ed Woodward, club chairman and executive vice-chairman, respectively.

Werner and Woodward refused, feeling that they had nothing to apologise for. They claimed to have merely been discussing a list of ideas, to have been brainstorming some forward-planning, and it was unfortunate that they had leaked into the public domain. This led to incredulity in some quarters.

The major conclusion of the get-together, which had been convened at short notice, was that the 20 clubs unanimously agreed to work together on a strategic reform programme for the game and, significantly, not to endorse Project Big Picture. In other words, Liverpool and United had to give their blessing to work as a part of the existing collective and to say that PBP was not something that could be construed as coming from the league or its clubs.

The clubs also agreed to offer the EFL a bailout but on far less generous terms than the £250m being sought. A combined £50m will be offered to League One and Two clubs, with almost two-thirds of that for teams in League One, and Championship clubs will be offered access to loans.

“All 20 Premier League clubs today unanimously agreed that Project Big Picture will not be endorsed or pursued by the Premier League, or the FA,” the league said in a statement.

“Further, Premier League shareholders agreed to work together as a 20-club collective on a strategic plan for the future structures and financing of English football, consulting with all stakeholders to ensure a vibrant, competitive and sustainable football pyramid.”

Good.   Glad the other 14 clubs stood up to them.  Embarrassing episode of greed.

And glad to see money going down to League One and League Two and, quite rightly in my view, loans for Championship clubs - just like a lot of businesses up and down the country have had to take loans.

Think that's a sensible outcome all around

Am I missing some info?

. EFL to get massive payout, saving some clubs

. Prem league reduced to 18 teams to ease fixture congestion

. League cup scrapped

. Less voting righrs for clubs with less time in prem league then others

On 1st point, surely that cant be a bad thing?

Point 2 not a bsd thing. Clubs like west ham wont go for it through fear of being the ones to lose out on being in the league

Point 3 I dont mind the league cup and its a good way to get game time for developing players or fringe players.

Point 4...why should yo yo clubs like Fulham and West Brom for example have the same say as other clubs in the affairs of the league, they likely wont be there next year, replaced by Norwich, wholl come up have an equal say then be gone rellaced by west brom or Fulham and so on

Whats the real negative to this that im obviously missing? Is it a tv deal issue?

No it's our club being greedy F***ing cu*ts.

We must be the only club where a plan to send 25 percent of our future broadcast revenue to lower league clubs, and advance 250 million to offset recent and ongoing losses to the same group of clubs, is categorized as "greedy." Then when instead its agreed to extend just 1/5 of that to the same clubs, that is a good thing.

The 20 "pound" cap on away ticketing and subsidizing of away fan travel: Greedy.

Maintaining keeping the money in the hands of the same 20-30 clubs, going forward, sound. No real plan to help the overwhelming majority of football  plans in the nation, fine with us.

But if player X isn't bought, or match Y isn't won, there will be hell to pay. An outrage.

It's the very definition of wanting to have one's cake and eat it too.

All very embarrassing really. Fenway or whatever they are called now have pretty much always managed to do the opposite of capture the public mood.

Been nipped in the Bud. Very happy with that outcome, now let's forget about it and move on to winning Back to Back!

From a LFC pov, there are a lot of positive developments in the proposals. Scrapping a competition and pre season game that nobody wants, a windfall for the lower league clubs who need it, the opportunity for this club to sell our own TV rights of unfashionable games that suit us, fewer league games needed to win a league, and an easier vote process for clubs like us to push through changes that work best for us, rather than other clubs. So as a club, we stand to gain a lot if the proposals go through. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas, so I don't think they will go through without tweaks to bits and pieces. But change shouldn't be automatically resisted, just because it's change. When you hear lower league clubs saying they're just weeks away from liquidation, they now have a choice. Accept the package on offer and stay afloat, or be left to sink or swim.

Thats where I'm at with this. The voting thing I'm not a fan of but everything else I like.

Good way for our owners to put an even bigger target on our backs. We’re one of the most hated teams outside of our fan base  this will only magnify that.

Good way for our owners to put an even bigger target on our backs. We’re one of the most hated teams outside of our fan base  this will only magnify that.

Who cares?

Been nipped in the Bud. Very happy with that outcome, now let's forget about it and move on to winning Back to Back!

This issue isn't going away. The lower leagues need bailed out and the Premier League isn't going to just give them a bunch of money with no changes or compromises. Something is going to (and needs to) happen. We might as well look out for our interests as a club.

This issue isn't going away. The lower leagues need bailed out and the Premier League isn't going to just give them a bunch of money with no changes or compromises. Something is going to (and needs to) happen. We might as well look out for our interests as a club.

It was nothing short of opportunism
Poorly timed and a flawed and poor idea

Dont think the "help" towards the EFL was anything other than  a PR attempt because they have literally zero sway in what happens in the PL. It was nothing more than hope that the EFL would praise the idea and get the public onside pressuring the rest of the PL

The idea goes against our fundamental ideas of socialism as a city and a club so personally I'm glad it fell on its face

If you want to help the EFL tgen help them but dont dress up the tokanism of help to simply get what you want
Whether the PL should help the EFL is a completely different thing but this wasnt help, this was an idea cooked up over the last few years and the owners have used this time to try to get it through

This and the whole furlough sh*te have deeply embarrassed us as a club and a city. FSG have been here ten years yet it’s evident they don’t know much about Liverpool do they.

Who cares?

I do & you should too.

I do & you should too.

Why? You do realize that there are already tens of thousands of people that hate our club simply because we are winning. Who gives a sh*t what other people think?

Stop worrying about what unreasonable people do or think, it will make your life a whole lot better. One of the biggest reasons I started getting off most all social media. People are idiots and especially now that they can voice their stupid opinions from the "safety" of behind their computers.

Why? You do realize that there are already tens of thousands of people that hate our club simply because we are winning. Who gives a sh*t what other people think?

Stop worrying about what unreasonable people do or think, it will make your life a whole lot better. One of the biggest reasons I started getting off most all social media. People are idiots and especially now that they can voice their stupid opinions from the "safety" of behind their computers.

I care when the clubs principles are shat on time and again by owners who simply either sont get it or refuse to get it.

Every ao often from increased ticket prices, trademarking 'Liverpool', furloughing staff and now this they fail to strike the right tone.

Tone deaf really.

Always felt Morientes would have adapted far quicker had we got him in the August when Madrid signed Owen, rather than having to wait until Jan.

Always felt Morientes would have adapted far quicker had we got him in the August when Madrid signed Owen, rather than having to wait until Jan.

Think you’re in the wrong thread mate

I care when the clubs principles are shat on time and again by owners who simply either sont get it or refuse to get it.

Every ao often from increased ticket prices, trademarking 'Liverpool', furloughing staff and now this they fail to strike the right tone.

Tone deaf really.

Haven't come out of it smelling of roses have they. The timing of it just smacked of a power grab when the game was in crisis. If they had come forward with a bit of democracy in the deal rather than the stitch up they tried, and also put out maybe a consultation paper or something similar they might've had half a chance.

The real issues I see are that the money men including our owners are driving another nail into the coffin of football fans nationwide,  they don't understand football's origin as a working class sport for working class people,  they are not interested that your great grandpa lifted you over the turnstiles back in the day no matter which club you support,

Money is what the want and they don't give a flying F**k who falls by the wayside as long as they make their profits,
At the end of the day the most important assets are the fans, if fans don't go to any given ground, or don't pay any particular subscription fee the money men are fu**ed,

All football club's fans both from the EFL & EPL should band together and demand what we want, at the moment the tail is wagging the dog,

The money men want total control as far as I can tell, and again that includes our Avaricious lot, who it has to be said are going against the very fabric of what our club is about,  now there are some good points raised in their plan but like what most are alluding to, it's a total power grab, and that just isn't right.


                                        YNWA

What do they, the fans, want? A "power grab" and a club to support. Or no power grab, and no club to support? Because apparantly, that is the choice facing many clubs atm.

The fans, us included, have been locked out of grounds for the past 6 months, and probably for the rest of this season. It's difficult enough for us to deal with, how are they going to manage ? A slice of the 50mn pie won't see them to the end of the season, for some it might not even see them to Christmas. Our club and a handful of others, put forward a detailed and lucrative bailout to safeguard their futures, and make our lives easier. They would rather have their traditions and their principles, rather than make the basic income and expenditure figures match up.

10 years ago today, we had some complex financial issues of our own to deal with. I was in Graz on the day, and was expecting the seemingly endless court cases back and forth to continue, when I was told the issues had been settled. We were saved in the nick of time. Other clubs won't be quite so lucky.

Wow we make a proposal then vote against it...stay classy San Diego

On Neville, why would pemier league clubs be expected to bail out EFL clubs? Are we supposed to say we wont sign Jota instead well give that 45 million to the EFL to distribute around the 72 clubs....come on

From today's presser: “First of all I think it is really important that we speak about it, because I can't remember the last time when we spoke about this, the space for improvement within football, in professional football. A lot of times in life there must be a crisis, not maybe a virus, but a crisis for people to start talking, so I'm really happy that people now start talking about it. Yes, it's very competitive and that's positive and nobody wanted to change that. I am not really in it, it's not that I was involved. I was informed from a specific point. But I can say that all the people I know who are involved (in Project Big Picture) are concerned about football. Yes, about Liverpool as well, it's normal, but about football in general. That was their intention. And now other people can  make of it what they want. If you want to understand the idea behind it I think it's possible. If you don't want, then you just knock it down. It's not a problem. We will play on football, before that, after that, but there are things we can improve and I really think that you always really need to improve them now, before you see the realy problems in the future, and that's what these people tried to do. When the process keeps on going and people are talking about it, then it's very, very positive."

- Jürgen Klopp

Think you’re in the wrong thread mate

Hahaha reckon I pressed back and posted!! F***ing buses and speed bumps

What do they, the fans, want? A "power grab" and a club to support. Or no power grab, and no club to support? Because apparantly, that is the choice facing many clubs atm.

The fans, us included, have been locked out of grounds for the past 6 months, and probably for the rest of this season. It's difficult enough for us to deal with, how are they going to manage ? A slice of the 50mn pie won't see them to the end of the season, for some it might not even see them to Christmas. Our club and a handful of others, put forward a detailed and lucrative bailout to safeguard their futures, and make our lives easier. They would rather have their traditions and their principles, rather than make the basic income and expenditure figures match up.

10 years ago today, we had some complex financial issues of our own to deal with. I was in Graz on the day, and was expecting the seemingly endless court cases back and forth to continue, when I was told the issues had been settled. We were saved in the nick of time. Other clubs won't be quite so lucky.

Waffling nonsense. The club was never in threat in that court case, plus FSG got us for a nice cheap price. Comparing that to what is going on is ludicrous. It's greed, nothing more nothing less. Just wrapped in an EFL charitable bow.