Television has too much power - Ferguson
- Thread starter BBC Sport
- Start date
- Replies 18
- Views 1K
Yeah they have a huge bearing over Premier League football, and yeah it sucks. But I'm sure Ferguson would rather the system we have than the one in Spain. I'd personally rather just be able to watch the match I want to watch! What's the point in videoing every game and not letting us watch them live?
How exactly are they being biased?
How exactly are they being biased?
This. For all the flaws, its still better than what happens in Spain. Wouldnt say its baised, but they then spent half the article talking about united than the real issue, more shoddy journalism than anything
Slur Alex not remembering things again??? surely he must remember how Man Ure became successful, through BSkyB's money if i recall correctly??? Wasnt it just after that investment they started winning things????? Cant stand the way he is made out to be a saint and what he speaks is gospel!!!!
Well done on missing the point entirely. its not even about United. its about the game as a whole. We very rarely see games played on a saturday lunchtime any more, they are just shifted around for TV. Whether it's said by SAF or anyone else, the point he is making is 100% valid
Ya'll should look into USA Collegiate Football conference realignments.
Basically there are 120 top division football teams. almost all of them are in their own "league" (or conference) with their own payouts and TV deals. Some teams want to go to different conferences (more prestige/money).
Well the top conferences are only looking at teams who improve their market share and can bring in more millions of dollars, while disregarding the quality of the football program and the quality of their academics.
It's ruining collegiate amateurism
Basically there are 120 top division football teams. almost all of them are in their own "league" (or conference) with their own payouts and TV deals. Some teams want to go to different conferences (more prestige/money).
Well the top conferences are only looking at teams who improve their market share and can bring in more millions of dollars, while disregarding the quality of the football program and the quality of their academics.
It's ruining collegiate amateurism
Indeed, you only have to look at Spain's system to see the inequality. I can very much see where he is coming from, and SAF is right, but it could be worse
Yeah I read a few articles about that earlier, didn't fully understand but aren't a lot of the teams in the same region or whatever it's called coming together in a deal that is similar to the English Premier League. i.e All the money goes into a pot and is shared amongst the 10 or 12 teams. And even after a team leaves their division (probably to make more money) they still have to share it fairly with the other 9 or so teams. I've heard 3 or 4 regions have done this now/ are talking about doing this, is that better than what happens at the moment?
I think what Ferguson's main point is that the majority of the money goes to other parties, and he's got a point. From domestic TV money Premier League clubs will receive around 50%, I think about 300m per year goes to Football League, youth academies, charities etc. That leaves about 400m unaccounted for (I did pluck this figure out of thing air, it's too late to work things out properly, feel free to correct me!). Now I can only assume this money goes into the 'running' of the FA and Premier League.
Now international TV money is even worse. Premier League clubs receive around 25% of international TV money that the Premier League receive, not sure entirely how much the collective TV rights cost but I think it's north of 500 million, considering Premier League auction the rights to about 200 countries.
Does make you wonder where it's all going, and although the BBC have (inadvertadly [yeah right]) made SAF out to look like a tight old money-grabber this is actually a serious issue for the clubs. They have a **** of a lot more TV money than they did 4 or 5 years ago but in all honestly there is a lot that's being held back!
Also in my honest opinion I couldn't get a **** if United made 60m or 60p from TV money last year, all I care about is being able to waste an entire weekend watching football, without having to buy Sky HD + sports + ESPN + magic 3D glasses-socks that make everything better (and cost and extra 10 pound per months kthnks) etc. Maybe I iz just communist?
Last edited:
Yeah I read a few articles about that earlier, didn't fully understand but aren't a lot of the teams in the same region or whatever it's called coming together in a deal that is similar to the English Premier League. i.e All the money goes into a pot and is shared amongst the 10 or 12 teams. And even after a team leaves their division (probably to make more money) they still have to share it fairly with the other 9 or so teams. I've heard 3 or 4 regions have done this now/ are talking about doing this, is that better than what happens at the moment?
I think what Ferguson's main point is that the majority of the money goes to other parties, and he's got a point. From domestic TV money Premier League clubs will receive around 50%, I think about 300m per year goes to Football League, youth academies, charities etc. That leaves about 400m unaccounted for (I did pluck this figure out of thing air, it's too late to work things out properly, feel free to correct me!). Now I can only assume this money goes into the 'running' of the FA and Premier League.
Now international TV money is even worse. Premier League clubs receive around 25% of international TV money that the Premier League receive, not sure entirely how much the collective TV rights cost but I think it's north of 500 million, considering Premier League auction the rights to about 200 countries.
Does make you wonder where it's all going, and although the BBC have (inadvertadly [yeah right]) made SAF out to look like a tight old money-grabber this is actually a serious issue for the clubs. They have a **** of a lot more TV money than they did 4 or 5 years ago but in all honestly there is a lot that's being held back!
Also in my honest opinion I couldn't get a **** if United made 60m or 60p from TV money last year, all I care about is being able to waste and entire weekend watching football, without having to buy Sky HD + sports + ESPN etc. Maybe I iz just communist?
And its on the international bearing that the clubs may rebel.
And the bold is so true
Well done Sir Alex. He could easily make the case that United deserve the money since they're a bigger pull than, say, Swansea, but he's a fair man.
---------- Post added at 10:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:54 PM ----------
So **** true. Though Joel' will probably disagree, since he's a Hitler-loving facist.
---------- Post added at 10:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:54 PM ----------
Also in my honest opinion I couldn't get a **** if United made 60m or 60p from TV money last year, all I care about is being able to waste an entire weekend watching football, without having to buy Sky HD + sports + ESPN + magic 3D glasses-socks that make everything better (and cost and extra 10 pound per months kthnks) etc. Maybe I iz just communist?
So **** true. Though Joel' will probably disagree, since he's a Hitler-loving facist.
Yeah Mike it will be an interesting few months, I'm hoping the courts destroy BSkyB but let's be honest it won't happen, they will keep their monopoly and we will continue to pay for half decent matches coverage of whatever game they feel like putting on.
Well to be fair to Swansea they will get a lot less than United in TV money. Each club will get their base pay + a 700k bonus for each position (i.e League winners get 14m - 20th get 700k) teams also get a bonus for how many times they are on TV, not sure entirely what the figures are but basically a team United who may have 20 or so games on TV will be paid a lot more than Swansea who will recieve the base payment for only being on a few times.
So in reality United will earn around 60m per year while Swansea will be on 30m or so, quite a big difference but still nowhere near what the clubs should be paid in relation to the billions that the Premier League pimp them out for.
[Also if what you say about Joel' is true... Then, well he just sucks. I speak da truth!]
Well to be fair to Swansea they will get a lot less than United in TV money. Each club will get their base pay + a 700k bonus for each position (i.e League winners get 14m - 20th get 700k) teams also get a bonus for how many times they are on TV, not sure entirely what the figures are but basically a team United who may have 20 or so games on TV will be paid a lot more than Swansea who will recieve the base payment for only being on a few times.
So in reality United will earn around 60m per year while Swansea will be on 30m or so, quite a big difference but still nowhere near what the clubs should be paid in relation to the billions that the Premier League pimp them out for.
[Also if what you say about Joel' is true... Then, well he just sucks. I speak da truth!]
Well definitely. It's a MUCH fairer system than Spain though, where the duopoly of Madrid and Barca will only keep getting stronger if they continue to be paid something like 80% of the revenue between them. At least here we can keep some semblance of competition going.
Don't think he loves Hitler, he's just a bit right wing and therefore evul.
Kind of on topic kind of off topic - but this Saturday's match between Manchester United will be the first time since April 9th 2010 that Manchester United have kicked off at 3pm on a Saturday and Saturday will end a run of 21 straight #MUFC games televised live on Sky or terrestrial TV in the UK. Last 11 last season, first 10 this.
Last edited:
Well, there are about 12 conferences in the top division, each of them having their own TV deals and money sharing. There are 6 main conferences with the best teams and the best TV deals. There is no money sharing between conferences, only within conferences.
Teams leaving a conference to join a different one will no longer have to share money with the previous conference (the money sharing is only for conference TV deals and End of Season "Bowl" games that match teams up from different conferences) However, when a team leaves a conference, they must essentially Buy Out their contract with that conference ei...pay a large fee.
My Alma Mater is currently in a **** storm with this. We have mediocre academics but we have one of the best teams in the entire nation. However we have mediocre market share and two teams from our conference just left to take more money in a different conference (Pittsburgh and a New York team). Basically the conference that those two teams are joining (the ACC) wanted to expand their new TV deal they just signed by opening up the New York City and Pittsburgh TV markets.
However their academics are no better than my alma mater's and their sports programs are worse. The conference change has nothing to do with improving academics or competitiveness and has everything to do with finances. This leaves my university is a BIG hole. We may be playing in a conference with just 6 teams! What is worse is no other conference will invite us to their conference because we have no large population centers in our area. I have faith, but it appears greed for the almighty dollar could cause my favorite football team to regress half a century.
I dont see no problem with it at all, his squad are playing at home in both games against opponents his side should be able to beat with or without major injuries. You have to live with the TV meddling because without it most clubs wouldnt be able to survive so you have to just like it and get on with it.
Okay, well I read about something called the 'Big 12' in which they will pool together, I assume it is because they are sick of teams ditching their league for another just to get more money. Obviously I don't know how that effects your team because I don't really understand College football. However I assume that there has been a problem with leagues grooming colleges offering them more money if they quit their division and join another. Why can't they just enforce a law that you must play in the league that you are geographically closest too.. Seems like the most simple option.
I realize this is totally off topic but I don't really care.. And I will come back to the previous point, do you think colleges negotiating their own TV money is better than pooling together?
Ya, the state should totally tax everyone to provide 90mins worth of entertainment a week for some, and they'd just **** it up anyway.
Oh hai.
Yes it's true that TV has more power, but since i'm a fan and not a manager I don't mind. As I don't have the money for a season ticket, the fact games are shifted around means I get to watch my team more often. Besides I can't see why sir alex is moaning that they have to play a european game on tuesday (or was it wednesday?) and then a league game on saturday lunchtime. They're professionals and paid ridiculous amounts of money, they should just deal with it.