I am curious to how supporters reacted to changes being imposed on the league structure in days long gone.
I suppose it depends on when your born. things that seemed stable and familiar enhanced a sense of tradition.
but there were numerous alterations previously, for instance when they had the old divisions north and south back in the 20's through to the late 50's. latterly we have had play off's to get used to. Its apparent the FA are a toothless tiger now, and the clamour for influence with the elite wealthy clubs and tv companies is looking grubbier by the day.
Bad timing as well with fans unable to attend and reliant on exorbitant fees to watch games on the box.
not saying its close to a tipping point, but the powers that be ought to tread very carefully in the coming months. Football fans are not stupid by and large, and they will not just accept everything that comes their way without a reaction.
Premier League - Project Big Picture
-
Wile E Coyote
- Posts: 8525
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:22 pm
- Been Liked: 2889 times
- Has Liked: 1763 times
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
This user liked this post: ClaretPope
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Statement from FA Chairman Greg Clarke - prepared to use Golden share in the interest of the game and veto moves that threaten it 
OUR CHAIRMAN GREG CLARKE HAS WRITTEN TO FA COUNCIL MEMBERS AHEAD OF OCTOBER MEETING
Tuesday 13 Oct 2020
The FA Chairman Greg Clarke has written to Council members
Dear Colleagues,
I trust that you are well in these difficult times and look forward to speaking with you all on Thursday at our Council meeting.
Prior to that, I thought it important to provide a perspective on the recent discussions in the media related to potential changes to English football. When the news first emerged, we immediately agreed a joint paragraph with the Premier League for their statement:
English football is the world’s most watched, and has a vibrant, dynamic and competitive league structure that drives interest around the globe. To maintain this position, it is important that we all work together. Both the Premier League and the FA support a wide-ranging discussion on the future of the game, including its competition structures, calendar and overall financing, particularly in light of the effects of COVID-19.
Our perspective is that we have a fantastic league structure and pyramid that is the envy of the world. While we should always be open to evolve, to move the game forwards, changes have to be done in the right way and with a long-term perspective in mind.
We are fully aware that there are huge financial pressures throughout the game and collectively we need to work hard so that our clubs survive the pandemic. However, we must separate this need from discussions about the potential long-term structure of our wonderful game. Of course, if we can agree changes that are beneficial in the long term and have an immediate positive impact, we will consider that. Equally, we cannot be forced into short term decisions that would be damaging in the long term.
We will always have conversations with stakeholders at both a national and international level to understand any changes to the landscape that could impact our structure and listen to ideas that are put forward. However, we would only offer formal support for any proposal when it goes through the proper channels and has a full evaluation.
With the knowledge of senior Board members and our CEO, I participated in the early stages of discussions which were disclosed last weekend. It is very important stakeholders discuss resolving some of the strategic issues facing our game such as, for example, fixture congestion.
However, in late spring, when the principal aim of these discussions became the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few clubs with a breakaway league mooted as a threat, I of course, discontinued my involvement and counselled a more consensus-based approach involving all Premier League clubs and its Chair and CEO. Our game needs to continually seek to improve but benefits need to be shared.
We, the FA Board and Council, have to ensure that any changes would be to the long-term benefit of the whole of football and we have substantial controls to help ensure that the best interests of the game are served by any new proposals.
In addition, to the Special Share in the Premier League, which prevents certain changes being made to the constitution without the FA’s consent, it is also the FA’s responsibility to sanction competitions in England – including any proposed new competition – as well as being responsible for licensing clubs, through UEFA, to play in Europe. Additionally, UEFA look to us to nominate the league, and therefore the clubs, that will play in their competitions.
Let’s continue to work together to determine what is best for English football, with full dialogue between all key stakeholders. However, there is more to our game than economics. Change must benefit clubs, fans and players; not just selective balance sheets. In these difficult times unity, transparency and common purpose must override the interests of the few.
Greg Clarke
FA Chairman
OUR CHAIRMAN GREG CLARKE HAS WRITTEN TO FA COUNCIL MEMBERS AHEAD OF OCTOBER MEETING
Tuesday 13 Oct 2020
The FA Chairman Greg Clarke has written to Council members
Dear Colleagues,
I trust that you are well in these difficult times and look forward to speaking with you all on Thursday at our Council meeting.
Prior to that, I thought it important to provide a perspective on the recent discussions in the media related to potential changes to English football. When the news first emerged, we immediately agreed a joint paragraph with the Premier League for their statement:
English football is the world’s most watched, and has a vibrant, dynamic and competitive league structure that drives interest around the globe. To maintain this position, it is important that we all work together. Both the Premier League and the FA support a wide-ranging discussion on the future of the game, including its competition structures, calendar and overall financing, particularly in light of the effects of COVID-19.
Our perspective is that we have a fantastic league structure and pyramid that is the envy of the world. While we should always be open to evolve, to move the game forwards, changes have to be done in the right way and with a long-term perspective in mind.
We are fully aware that there are huge financial pressures throughout the game and collectively we need to work hard so that our clubs survive the pandemic. However, we must separate this need from discussions about the potential long-term structure of our wonderful game. Of course, if we can agree changes that are beneficial in the long term and have an immediate positive impact, we will consider that. Equally, we cannot be forced into short term decisions that would be damaging in the long term.
We will always have conversations with stakeholders at both a national and international level to understand any changes to the landscape that could impact our structure and listen to ideas that are put forward. However, we would only offer formal support for any proposal when it goes through the proper channels and has a full evaluation.
With the knowledge of senior Board members and our CEO, I participated in the early stages of discussions which were disclosed last weekend. It is very important stakeholders discuss resolving some of the strategic issues facing our game such as, for example, fixture congestion.
However, in late spring, when the principal aim of these discussions became the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few clubs with a breakaway league mooted as a threat, I of course, discontinued my involvement and counselled a more consensus-based approach involving all Premier League clubs and its Chair and CEO. Our game needs to continually seek to improve but benefits need to be shared.
We, the FA Board and Council, have to ensure that any changes would be to the long-term benefit of the whole of football and we have substantial controls to help ensure that the best interests of the game are served by any new proposals.
In addition, to the Special Share in the Premier League, which prevents certain changes being made to the constitution without the FA’s consent, it is also the FA’s responsibility to sanction competitions in England – including any proposed new competition – as well as being responsible for licensing clubs, through UEFA, to play in Europe. Additionally, UEFA look to us to nominate the league, and therefore the clubs, that will play in their competitions.
Let’s continue to work together to determine what is best for English football, with full dialogue between all key stakeholders. However, there is more to our game than economics. Change must benefit clubs, fans and players; not just selective balance sheets. In these difficult times unity, transparency and common purpose must override the interests of the few.
Greg Clarke
FA Chairman
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
A timely and considered response clearly reminding everyone that the FA are the ultimate legal entity when it comes to the laws of the game and competition structure .
I do wonder whether the owners of the big 2 north west clubs fully realised the potential veto power of the golden share.!
I do wonder whether the owners of the big 2 north west clubs fully realised the potential veto power of the golden share.!
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Nit too much surprise in this report on today's EFL meeting in the Mail - key sentence for me "The split in the EFL appears to centre on how desperate clubs are for a rescue package to get through the rest of the season"
EXCLUSIVE: EFL clubs are SPLIT over support for Project Big Picture after meetings involving all 72 sides end without an agreement on controversial plans drawn up by Liverpool and Manchester United
- Liverpool and Manchester United have drawn up plans for Project Big Picture
- EFL clubs failed to reach an agreement after meetings were held on Tuesday
- Championship clubs are understood to be supporting EFL chairman Rick Parry
- Clubs in League One and League Two are less sure of the radical new proposals
- The split appears to centre on how desperate clubs are for a rescue package
By MATT HUGHES FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 16:15, 13 October 2020 | UPDATED: 16:45, 13 October 2020
EFL clubs are split over whether to support Project Big Picture with meetings of the three divisions involving all 72 clubs held today breaking up without a firm agreement.
While the Championship clubs are understood to have offered chairman Rick Parry their support to continuing his negotiations over a radical restructure to the Premier League that would bring increased funding for the EFL, Sportsmail has learned that clubs in League One and League Two were far more critical of the proposals that have been produced by Liverpool and Manchester United.
A number of clubs expressed concern that the Premier League's clear anger at Parry's involvement in secret talks with Liverpool and Manchester United could jeopardise the bailout they are seeking to survive for the rest of the season, a widespread fear reported by Sportsmail on Monday.
Other clubs also voiced unhappiness that they had not been kept informed about the negotiations or talks with investment companies about providing external funding, including an offer from TPG to buy a 20 per cent stake in the EFL for £300million that was rejected last week.
The split in the EFL appears to centre on how desperate clubs are for a rescue package to get through the rest of the season, which has been further jeopardised by Parry's involvement in clandestine negotiations with Liverpool and United, leading the Premier League to threaten to walk away from the process.
As many as seven clubs in League One and Two need extra funding to ensure they can pay all their players this month so are wary of further antagonising the Premier League, who have made clear their strong opposition to the Project Big Six Proposals.
The Championship clubs had largely given up hope of receiving money from the Premier League, who view those in the second tier as competitors, so have less to lose and are therefore willing to support Parry's continued liaison with the Big Six.
There is also genuine excitement in the second tier about what Parry has described as a 'financial reset' to reduce the gap between the Premier League and the lower divisions, which if introduced would include an immediate rescue package of £250m to offset the loss of gate receipts during the pandemic, as well as a pledge of a 25 per cent share in the top flight's next television rights contract, estimated to be worth around £700m-a-year to the EFL.
In a separate development, FA chairman Greg Clarke has written to the FA Council ahead of a meeting on Wednesday to clarify the governing body's position.
While the FA have specific concerns about plans to abolish the Community Shield in particular, Clarke will tell Council members that they will not come to a firm view until a package of reforms has been agreed by the Premier League.
EXCLUSIVE: EFL clubs are SPLIT over support for Project Big Picture after meetings involving all 72 sides end without an agreement on controversial plans drawn up by Liverpool and Manchester United
- Liverpool and Manchester United have drawn up plans for Project Big Picture
- EFL clubs failed to reach an agreement after meetings were held on Tuesday
- Championship clubs are understood to be supporting EFL chairman Rick Parry
- Clubs in League One and League Two are less sure of the radical new proposals
- The split appears to centre on how desperate clubs are for a rescue package
By MATT HUGHES FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 16:15, 13 October 2020 | UPDATED: 16:45, 13 October 2020
EFL clubs are split over whether to support Project Big Picture with meetings of the three divisions involving all 72 clubs held today breaking up without a firm agreement.
While the Championship clubs are understood to have offered chairman Rick Parry their support to continuing his negotiations over a radical restructure to the Premier League that would bring increased funding for the EFL, Sportsmail has learned that clubs in League One and League Two were far more critical of the proposals that have been produced by Liverpool and Manchester United.
A number of clubs expressed concern that the Premier League's clear anger at Parry's involvement in secret talks with Liverpool and Manchester United could jeopardise the bailout they are seeking to survive for the rest of the season, a widespread fear reported by Sportsmail on Monday.
Other clubs also voiced unhappiness that they had not been kept informed about the negotiations or talks with investment companies about providing external funding, including an offer from TPG to buy a 20 per cent stake in the EFL for £300million that was rejected last week.
The split in the EFL appears to centre on how desperate clubs are for a rescue package to get through the rest of the season, which has been further jeopardised by Parry's involvement in clandestine negotiations with Liverpool and United, leading the Premier League to threaten to walk away from the process.
As many as seven clubs in League One and Two need extra funding to ensure they can pay all their players this month so are wary of further antagonising the Premier League, who have made clear their strong opposition to the Project Big Six Proposals.
The Championship clubs had largely given up hope of receiving money from the Premier League, who view those in the second tier as competitors, so have less to lose and are therefore willing to support Parry's continued liaison with the Big Six.
There is also genuine excitement in the second tier about what Parry has described as a 'financial reset' to reduce the gap between the Premier League and the lower divisions, which if introduced would include an immediate rescue package of £250m to offset the loss of gate receipts during the pandemic, as well as a pledge of a 25 per cent share in the top flight's next television rights contract, estimated to be worth around £700m-a-year to the EFL.
In a separate development, FA chairman Greg Clarke has written to the FA Council ahead of a meeting on Wednesday to clarify the governing body's position.
While the FA have specific concerns about plans to abolish the Community Shield in particular, Clarke will tell Council members that they will not come to a firm view until a package of reforms has been agreed by the Premier League.
-
GodIsADeeJay81
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Supporters Trusts of the big 6 unite in a statement opposing Project Big Picture
Tuesday 13th October 2020
Joint Statement: Project Big Picture
AST joins fans of Manchester City, Liverpool, Spurs, Chelsea and Manchester United to oppose Project Big Picture
The fans we represent are fortunate to support clubs that regularly secure the largest financial revenues in the Premier League. But all of us understand that football doesn’t work in isolation. It’s a family. It requires a fair share of resources to ensure that the Premier League is competitive to watch and that the lower leagues flourish as part of our national game.
While the six clubs we support are widely reported to be the instigators of Project Big Picture, it is important we state very clearly that we do not support the proposals in their current form.
The Premier League has rightly said that all stakeholders should be involved in discussions about the future of the game. And yet supporters have not had the courtesy of any communication or consultation about these plans before they were published last Sunday, despite allegedly being three years in the making.
By floating this latest plan, those behind it are acknowledging football needs to be reformed. It’s something we have been saying for many years. There are some suggestions in this plan that have merit. But we are totally opposed to concentrating power in the hands of six billionaire owners and departing from the one club, one vote and collective ethos of the Premier League. This part of the proposal must be dropped immediately if other elements are to be given serious consideration.
We welcome the Government reiterating its plan for a supporter-led review into football governance. This needs to happen as a matter of urgency and supporter groups must be consulted on the terms of reference. These terms must include how fans are to be given a greater say in the running of their clubs and a chance to be involved in ownership structures.
We call on the Government and football authorities to now work urgently to secure a sustainable future for all clubs, many of which face serious threats to their existence as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. We also expect both parties to make a genuine commitment to reform and to listen to our members. Fans are the lifeblood of the game. We need to be heard as soon as possible.
Arsenal Supporters’ Trust
Chelsea Supporters’ Trust
Spirit of Shankly (Liverpool Supporters’ Union)
Manchester City FC Supporters Club (The OSC)
Manchester United Supporters’ Trust
Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust
Tuesday 13th October 2020
Joint Statement: Project Big Picture
AST joins fans of Manchester City, Liverpool, Spurs, Chelsea and Manchester United to oppose Project Big Picture
The fans we represent are fortunate to support clubs that regularly secure the largest financial revenues in the Premier League. But all of us understand that football doesn’t work in isolation. It’s a family. It requires a fair share of resources to ensure that the Premier League is competitive to watch and that the lower leagues flourish as part of our national game.
While the six clubs we support are widely reported to be the instigators of Project Big Picture, it is important we state very clearly that we do not support the proposals in their current form.
The Premier League has rightly said that all stakeholders should be involved in discussions about the future of the game. And yet supporters have not had the courtesy of any communication or consultation about these plans before they were published last Sunday, despite allegedly being three years in the making.
By floating this latest plan, those behind it are acknowledging football needs to be reformed. It’s something we have been saying for many years. There are some suggestions in this plan that have merit. But we are totally opposed to concentrating power in the hands of six billionaire owners and departing from the one club, one vote and collective ethos of the Premier League. This part of the proposal must be dropped immediately if other elements are to be given serious consideration.
We welcome the Government reiterating its plan for a supporter-led review into football governance. This needs to happen as a matter of urgency and supporter groups must be consulted on the terms of reference. These terms must include how fans are to be given a greater say in the running of their clubs and a chance to be involved in ownership structures.
We call on the Government and football authorities to now work urgently to secure a sustainable future for all clubs, many of which face serious threats to their existence as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. We also expect both parties to make a genuine commitment to reform and to listen to our members. Fans are the lifeblood of the game. We need to be heard as soon as possible.
Arsenal Supporters’ Trust
Chelsea Supporters’ Trust
Spirit of Shankly (Liverpool Supporters’ Union)
Manchester City FC Supporters Club (The OSC)
Manchester United Supporters’ Trust
Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust
-
ClaretPope
- Posts: 872
- Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:14 pm
- Been Liked: 79 times
- Has Liked: 437 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Interesting quote from Parry (as reported by the Daily Mail: Parry told the Independent of the Premier League in 2018: 'Transparency is key, with each club having a single vote and no sub-committees. This means there is proper accountability.' What’s changed, Rick?
-
brexit
- Posts: 1491
- Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:20 am
- Been Liked: 236 times
- Has Liked: 58 times
- Location: on the gravy train in strasbourg
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Additionally, UEFA look to us to nominate the league, and therefore the clubs, that will play in their competitions."
There is a counter threat if I ever saw one. Imagine nominating the championship. We might be in the champions league sooner than we think.
There is a counter threat if I ever saw one. Imagine nominating the championship. We might be in the champions league sooner than we think.
-
Stalbansclaret
- Posts: 2503
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:21 am
- Been Liked: 1664 times
- Has Liked: 2974 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Just had the Fleetwood chairman on Radio 5 and he stated that only Accrington and Lincoln not in favour of Project Big Picture based on a meeting held yesterday (League One). He was keen on all it's components when questioned though he completely avoided the issue when asked about the Premier League voting rights proposal saying that that was for the PL clubs to determine. Such is the financial plight of so many EFL clubs that they are content to see the game sold to half a dozen billionaires , with all the attendant danger for the future. Can't help thinking that the Government should step in if the FA and PL can't regulate English football properly .....it's nauseating to see Big 6 greed lurking behind a veil of benevolence to the EFL at a time when clubs are so desperate.
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Why the ridiculous big picture idea? I would have thought the theory is fairly simple.
1. The FL clubs definitely need a bailout this year because of Covid. That must happen.
2. It seems fair enough that the PL money ought to be shared down the league more equitably. That should be considered.
3. What the blankety-blank has the PL voting system got to do with any of that?
1. The FL clubs definitely need a bailout this year because of Covid. That must happen.
2. It seems fair enough that the PL money ought to be shared down the league more equitably. That should be considered.
3. What the blankety-blank has the PL voting system got to do with any of that?
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
The £250m the EFL seems to be excited about is actually advanced money that will be deducted from future payments, you know like the way the Premier League had advanced most of this seasons monies - there is no gift/grant to the EFL unlike the Premier Leagues offer.
As for your point it is important to look at the nuance of the details that keep on emerging from PBG because the detail describes a system where by 2026 there will be:
- a 4:1 distribution in the Premier League (based over 4 years of Premier League performance (substantial repayments - up to 25% of central payments - to the Premier League if you don't stay up for all those seasons).
- Clubs given all overseas rights for 8 games and possibly all domestic rights on 7 games if Saturday 3 pm watershed is scrapped thereby drastically devaluing collective broadcast rights enormously, which will not all spread the revenue gap wider but actually mean that the monies passed down to EFL teams may actually be less than what it is now before they enter the deal.
- Shutting down the league cup also removes opportunity for football fortune as chances are halved for lower league clubs as more clubs focus on the FA cup - most years a lower league club will add 25% -50% to their revenue with a League cup run - It was Rochdale last year
- Lower League clubs, will have their academies threatened as rules on travel distance and number of centres a club can have are changes - this will have huge impact in the South East especially where there are no Premier League clubs to swallow all the talent but great work has been done by the likes of Exeter
- the £100m of good causes it has pledge to help includes the EFL - the only named good cause, effectively the proponents of PBG see the EFL as a charity case
I could go on
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
An illustration of why some clubs - I stress not all - should not be bailed out by clubs in the Premier League
https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 6256489472
that single year earnings (it was more the year before) is over 3 times (possibly 4 times) the wealth of Mike Garlick
https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/statu ... 6256489472
that single year earnings (it was more the year before) is over 3 times (possibly 4 times) the wealth of Mike Garlick
This user liked this post: randomclaret2
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
I have been posting thought from Vysyble on the MMT thread for years, and for longer than that they have been talking about what American Ownership would eventually seek to do in the Premier League - In their latest blog piece they look at (what should now be referred to as) "Project Big Profit"
https://vysyble.com/blog
I should add the the theory of Economic Profit is not universally popular in business circles (it is much harder to achieve) unless you are Warren Buffet. I feel that it has great relevance to top end football though. It is something our club has been good at in the Premier League years though we failed to achieve it in the last published financial results.
https://vysyble.com/blog
I should add the the theory of Economic Profit is not universally popular in business circles (it is much harder to achieve) unless you are Warren Buffet. I feel that it has great relevance to top end football though. It is something our club has been good at in the Premier League years though we failed to achieve it in the last published financial results.
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Not sure that the theory of Economic Profit is particularly enlightening when looking at BFC. You may as well look at PBT or EBITDA trends given the absence of long term debt and the stability of our equity. The difference, from what I can see, is a relatively arbritrary calculation of the cost of equity. Might be useful for making comparisons but even then you would probably instinctively arrive at the same conclusions.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
The End of the Beginning - from the Telegraph
Liverpool and Man United forced to abandon Project Big Picture
SAM WALLACE OCTOBER 14, 2020
Liverpool and Manchester United were forced to abandon Project Big Picture (PBP) in extraordinary fashion today, backed into a corner by the rest of the Premier League clubs who said that they would never agree to the radical proposals to concentrate power in the hands of the biggest.
The clubs told Liverpool and United that the plan, revealed on Sunday by Telegraph Sport, was a non-starter and that there was no prospect of them agreeing to the measures which, among others abolished the one-club, one-vote democracy and gave 25 per cent of all future revenues to the Football League.
The Premier League is understood to be prepared to announce that it has reached unanimous agreement with all 20 members, including Liverpool and Manchester United that it will not consider the proposals.
Instead it will look at formulating as a collective a strategic plan for the future structures and financing of English football. It will also announce that it will not endorse Project Big Picture and neither will its clubs or the FA. The FA chairman Greg Clarke also called into today's Premier League meeting
Support for Project Big Picture had been severing in the English Football League on Wednesday morning after two League One clubs challenged claims that the plan had their “unanimous” backing.
Jez Moxey, the chief executive of Burton Albion and also an EFL board member, had said on Tuesday that there was “unanimous” League One support for a proposal that would ensure an immediate £250 million Premier League bailout to the EFL but hand huge potential voting power to the ‘Big Six’ clubs.
But this was challenged by Lincoln chairman Clive Nates. “Was he asleep when I expressed my grave concerns at the meeting over this diabolical power grab,” he said. “I am vehemently against this deal in its present form. The acceptance of this deal without question by so many clubs is deeply concerning.”
Liverpool and Man United forced to abandon Project Big Picture
SAM WALLACE OCTOBER 14, 2020
Liverpool and Manchester United were forced to abandon Project Big Picture (PBP) in extraordinary fashion today, backed into a corner by the rest of the Premier League clubs who said that they would never agree to the radical proposals to concentrate power in the hands of the biggest.
The clubs told Liverpool and United that the plan, revealed on Sunday by Telegraph Sport, was a non-starter and that there was no prospect of them agreeing to the measures which, among others abolished the one-club, one-vote democracy and gave 25 per cent of all future revenues to the Football League.
The Premier League is understood to be prepared to announce that it has reached unanimous agreement with all 20 members, including Liverpool and Manchester United that it will not consider the proposals.
Instead it will look at formulating as a collective a strategic plan for the future structures and financing of English football. It will also announce that it will not endorse Project Big Picture and neither will its clubs or the FA. The FA chairman Greg Clarke also called into today's Premier League meeting
Support for Project Big Picture had been severing in the English Football League on Wednesday morning after two League One clubs challenged claims that the plan had their “unanimous” backing.
Jez Moxey, the chief executive of Burton Albion and also an EFL board member, had said on Tuesday that there was “unanimous” League One support for a proposal that would ensure an immediate £250 million Premier League bailout to the EFL but hand huge potential voting power to the ‘Big Six’ clubs.
But this was challenged by Lincoln chairman Clive Nates. “Was he asleep when I expressed my grave concerns at the meeting over this diabolical power grab,” he said. “I am vehemently against this deal in its present form. The acceptance of this deal without question by so many clubs is deeply concerning.”
-
ClaretTony
- Posts: 67805
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32409 times
- Has Liked: 5273 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Did these two clubs ever think they were going to get that through - seems one of the big six was going to break ranks and vote against it let alone the other clubs.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Premier League Statement
Premier League Statement: Shareholders' Meeting
October 14, 2020
Club News
Burnley Football Club chairman Mike Garlick and CEO Neil Hart today joined a shareholders’ meeting of all 20 Premier League clubs.
We fully endorse and support the following statement, which has been issued by the Premier League following the meeting.
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.
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.
Clubs will work collaboratively, in an open and transparent process, focusing on competition structure, calendar, governance and financial sustainability. This project has the full support of The FA and will include engagement with all relevant stakeholders including fans, Government and, of course, the EFL.
Also at today’s meeting it was agreed to make available a rescue package which aims to ensure that League One and League Two clubs will not go out of business as a result of the financial impact of COVID-19 and be able to complete the 2020/21 season.
League One and League Two clubs rely more heavily on matchday revenue and have fewer resources at their disposal than Championship or Premier League clubs and are therefore more at risk, especially at a time when fans are excluded from attending matches.
This offer will consist of grants and interest-free loans totalling a further £50 million on top of the £27.2m solidarity payments already advanced to League One and League Two this year, making a total of £77.2m.
Discussions will also continue with the EFL regarding Championship clubs’ financial needs. This addresses Government concerns about lower league clubs’ financial fragility.
Football is not the same without attending fans and the football economy is unsustainable without them. The Premier League and all our clubs remain committed to the safe return of fans as soon as possible.
Premier League Statement: Shareholders' Meeting
October 14, 2020
Club News
Burnley Football Club chairman Mike Garlick and CEO Neil Hart today joined a shareholders’ meeting of all 20 Premier League clubs.
We fully endorse and support the following statement, which has been issued by the Premier League following the meeting.
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.
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.
Clubs will work collaboratively, in an open and transparent process, focusing on competition structure, calendar, governance and financial sustainability. This project has the full support of The FA and will include engagement with all relevant stakeholders including fans, Government and, of course, the EFL.
Also at today’s meeting it was agreed to make available a rescue package which aims to ensure that League One and League Two clubs will not go out of business as a result of the financial impact of COVID-19 and be able to complete the 2020/21 season.
League One and League Two clubs rely more heavily on matchday revenue and have fewer resources at their disposal than Championship or Premier League clubs and are therefore more at risk, especially at a time when fans are excluded from attending matches.
This offer will consist of grants and interest-free loans totalling a further £50 million on top of the £27.2m solidarity payments already advanced to League One and League Two this year, making a total of £77.2m.
Discussions will also continue with the EFL regarding Championship clubs’ financial needs. This addresses Government concerns about lower league clubs’ financial fragility.
Football is not the same without attending fans and the football economy is unsustainable without them. The Premier League and all our clubs remain committed to the safe return of fans as soon as possible.
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
like I said CT The End of the BeginningClaretTony wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 4:46 pmDid these two clubs ever think they were going to get that through - seems one of the big six was going to break ranks and vote against it let alone the other clubs.
it took Liverpool 6 years to get overseas rights as merit payments, but it happened - much of this will come to pass at some point this decade
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
So Liverpool and Manchester United end up rejecting their own proposals?
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
No they acknowledge that Project Big Profit cannot continue but get the guarantee of the discussions they really want to have, and for which they are more prepared than anyone - given the 3 years they have been working on this
You have to remember these two clubs were given a blackball opportunity on the appointment of Richard Masters as PL Chief Exec (no other club was given that opportunity) - they also saw to it that he has only half the power of Richard Scudamore, by splitting his role into two, the rest went to another appointment. These clubs were also the reason other candidates to succeed Scudamore walked having met them for private meetings, they were thought to be impossible to work with it seems (that element included the rest of the big 6 too). They believe they can win
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
That's a pretty fatalistic assessment CP. There is always a possibility they lose and sell up.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:09 pmNo they acknowledge that Project Big Profit cannot continue but get the guarantee of the discussions they really want to have, and for which they are more prepared than anyone - given the 3 years they have been working on this
You have to remember these two clubs were given a blackball opportunity on the appointment of Richard Masters as PL Chief Exec (no other club was given that opportunity) - they also saw to it that he has only half the power of Richard Scudamore, by splitting his role into two, the rest went to another appointment. These clubs were also the reason other candidates to succeed Scudamore walked having met them for private meetings, they were though to be impossible to work with it seems (that element included the rest of the big 6 too). They believe they can win
If they want to retain domestic league broadcast revenue they have to persuade another 8 PL members to abandon one club one vote. Turkeys rarely vote for Christmas. Their other option is to join the EFL but they would need to persuade enough EFL clubs and risk legal and governmental intervention from the remaining 14 PL clubs.
-
Colburn_Claret
- Posts: 8130
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
- Been Liked: 3079 times
- Has Liked: 5044 times
- Location: Catterick N.Yorks
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
I think they ate kidding themselves if they think they can take control of the Premier league.Chester Perry wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:09 pmNo they acknowledge that Project Big Profit cannot continue but get the guarantee of the discussions they really want to have, and for which they are more prepared than anyone - given the 3 years they have been working on this
You have to remember these two clubs were given a blackball opportunity on the appointment of Richard Masters as PL Chief Exec (no other club was given that opportunity) - they also saw to it that he has only half the power of Richard Scudamore, by splitting his role into two, the rest went to another appointment. These clubs were also the reason other candidates to succeed Scudamore walked having met them for private meetings, they were thought to be impossible to work with it seems (that element included the rest of the big 6 too). They believe they can win
I can see a scenario where they leave to join a European league, after spitting their dummies, but every change they are after undermines the other 14 clubs in the league.
Their only other option is to try and create a big 10, but in doing that they undermine themselves.
Personally the sooner they **** off the better.
This user liked this post: Duffer_
-
warksclaret
- Posts: 6680
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1697 times
- Has Liked: 789 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
I see today from the local media that Garlick & Hart our Chairman and CEO respectively, have come out of hiding and endorsed the PL statement not to endorse Project Big Picture.
Great pity they could not make the same, or more of an effort in communicating to its fans (however brief) to put them at ease regarding not only the proposed take-over, but also the lack of activity in the transfer window, resulting in a MINUS £1M spend(taking into account money recovered on Gibsons loan) when we have the most depleted and ageing squad since promotion 5 years ago, with now the majority of its fan base concerned at the future of their club
Great pity they could not make the same, or more of an effort in communicating to its fans (however brief) to put them at ease regarding not only the proposed take-over, but also the lack of activity in the transfer window, resulting in a MINUS £1M spend(taking into account money recovered on Gibsons loan) when we have the most depleted and ageing squad since promotion 5 years ago, with now the majority of its fan base concerned at the future of their club
This user liked this post: BurnleyFC
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
The Americans have been buying up around Europe particularly France and Italy as well as in England, they see an opportunity and want to drive it to higher revenues and regular profitability if they cannot abolish relegation in the short to medium term they want to ensure that they have all the advantages that make it as unlikely as possible. I have posted more on the subject in the MMT thread today but is has been an underlying feature through it's 3 year existence.Duffer_ wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 6:09 pmThat's a pretty fatalistic assessment CP. There is always a possibility they lose and sell up.
If they want to retain domestic league broadcast revenue they have to persuade another 8 PL members to abandon one club one vote. Turkeys rarely vote for Christmas. Their other option is to join the EFL but they would need to persuade enough EFL clubs and risk legal and governmental intervention from the remaining 14 PL clubs.
the EFL is not an option if the FA don't sanction that League for UEFA qualification - the key mistake they have made so far is upsetting the FA with the power they have, they were lulled into a false sense of confidence that the FA would let them do want they want as they have never yet exercised the veto or even got involved in Premier League business.
-
Swizzlestick
- Posts: 4064
- Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:40 pm
- Been Liked: 1507 times
- Has Liked: 580 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Apropos of nothing, but I had a few dealings with Neil Hart back when he was at BFC in the Community and he was quite possibly one of the most obnoxious people I've ever spoken to. Hopefully just a few bad days.
This user liked this post: ClaretTony
-
elwaclaret
- Posts: 8987
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2009 times
- Has Liked: 2904 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Why?warksclaret wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 6:27 pmI see today from the local media that Garlick & Hart our Chairman and CEO respectively, have come out of hiding and endorsed the PL statement not to endorse Project Big Picture.
Great pity they could not make the same, or more of an effort in communicating to its fans (however brief) to put them at ease regarding not only the proposed take-over, but also the lack of activity in the transfer window, resulting in a MINUS £1M spend(taking into account money recovered on Gibsons loan) when we have the most depleted and ageing squad since promotion 5 years ago, with now the majority of its fan base concerned at the future of their club
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
There are two routes to profitability. One is to increase your revenue, irrespective of what is happening to the total size of the pie, and the other is to reduce your costs. The most interesting part of the US sports model is the salary cap but that would only work if there was agreement across Europe. Good luck with that but wouldn't it be sweet to see agents screwed over in a cost orientated restructure?
-
warksclaret
- Posts: 6680
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1697 times
- Has Liked: 789 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Why not- I have given my reasons
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
Luke Edwards in the Telegraph with the kind of sentiment for the big six you rarely get in the national media
If the 'Big Six' want to go, let's help them pack up and move on. If they want to stay, make them apologise
LUKE EDWARDS OCTOBER 14, 2020
If the self-styled Big Six want to break away from the rest of the Premier League, let them go. Let them make good on their threats, rip up the ransom note, shove it down their throats and give them a kick up the backside to help them on their way.
If they want to go, let's help them pack up and move on. If they want to stay, make them apologise. We have seen their threats, we have seen them offer a rescue pan to the EFL with one hand and a clenched fist power grab with the other. We have seen them for what they are. The question now should be, do we want them anymore?
When you threaten something, it is always best to know you can go through with it. The Big Six are bluffing so hammer that home. They need the Premier League, even as they launch their shameless attempt to seize total control of it.
There is, in reality, nowhere for them to go if they quit. They could join the EFL, but I am not sure Manchester United vs Wycombe Wanderers and Liverpool vs Rotherham holds much appeal or makes any sense to their broadcast partners while Everton, Wolves, Aston Villa, Leeds United, Newcastle, Leicester City and the rest remain in the top flight.
If they want to pursue their dream of a European Super League let them try find others to join them from the continent because it will be a while until they get enough teams and they can rot while they wait.
Premier League shake-up plans: The key players
How can they qualify for the Champions League next season if they are not in the Premier League anymore? What will their shareholders think about that? They are not the only side in this civil war who can make threats. The Football Association can deny them permission to compete in Uefa competitions if they want to play tough. I wonder how long their star players will be willing to wait around then?
What they should be doing now is festering on the consequences of their ugly collective ambition because, if they were to leave, the only realistic option, in the short and medium term, is a six-club competition run by and for themselves.
Let them crack on and do it. One of this self-interested cartel can win the league each year, they can be certain of that. They deserve each other’s company. Let them play in an exhibition tournament, touring it around the globe like a warped version of the Harlem Globetrotters.
Let them seek their own television deals, let them try and persuade the richest broadcasters in the world that they do not need the rest of English football to attract a global television audience.
Let them play each other from September to May, the big boys going at each other over and over again for months on end. Let them play in their own competition, where Manchester United can reacquaint themselves with Liverpool roughly once every five weeks.
Let them create a league where the fixtures come round with mundane regularity. Let their dream be to play in football’s equivalent of an American basketball division. 40 games a season against five different opponents. Let them go on tours to the Middle East, the Far East, South America, North America, Australasia and even Antarctica if they so wish.
Let them broadcast every single game on their own websites, let them put every single player up for an interview with their in house media, let them release as many fly-on-the-wall documentaries as they desire. One for each club - glossy, controlled and sanitised - every single year and see how quickly the novelty wears off.
And let the rest of us get on with watching the Premier League, free from their omnipotence, free from their greed.
The results will be far less predictable, the action no less intense, the interest just as widespread, perhaps even more so when you have different teams competing for silverware, different towns and cities celebrating the sort of success they are so intent on denying them their twisted scheme.
There might well be less money sloshing around the Premier League if they go, but they won't. And if they do go, simply promote the top six clubs from the Championship for next season and replace them. They will miss the Premier League when they see how it thrives without them. You can be sure of that. Meanwhile, everyone else - Premier League, Government and the Football Association - can focus on agreeing and delivering a rescue package for the EFL clubs facing financial oblivion in this global pandemic.
Offer them salvation without being forced to back this odious attempt by a group of billionaires to control the top level of English football forever more.
The majority of EFL owners may well back Project Big Picture but they are reacting like a loved one would respond to a ransom note. They all want something they love to survive and any price seems worth paying. Spare them that Hobson's choice and cut the Big Six adrift instead if we must.
There is a wonderful Geordie send-off given to someone who leaves an argument they have already lost. Off you ****. It has never felt more apt
If the 'Big Six' want to go, let's help them pack up and move on. If they want to stay, make them apologise
LUKE EDWARDS OCTOBER 14, 2020
If the self-styled Big Six want to break away from the rest of the Premier League, let them go. Let them make good on their threats, rip up the ransom note, shove it down their throats and give them a kick up the backside to help them on their way.
If they want to go, let's help them pack up and move on. If they want to stay, make them apologise. We have seen their threats, we have seen them offer a rescue pan to the EFL with one hand and a clenched fist power grab with the other. We have seen them for what they are. The question now should be, do we want them anymore?
When you threaten something, it is always best to know you can go through with it. The Big Six are bluffing so hammer that home. They need the Premier League, even as they launch their shameless attempt to seize total control of it.
There is, in reality, nowhere for them to go if they quit. They could join the EFL, but I am not sure Manchester United vs Wycombe Wanderers and Liverpool vs Rotherham holds much appeal or makes any sense to their broadcast partners while Everton, Wolves, Aston Villa, Leeds United, Newcastle, Leicester City and the rest remain in the top flight.
If they want to pursue their dream of a European Super League let them try find others to join them from the continent because it will be a while until they get enough teams and they can rot while they wait.
Premier League shake-up plans: The key players
How can they qualify for the Champions League next season if they are not in the Premier League anymore? What will their shareholders think about that? They are not the only side in this civil war who can make threats. The Football Association can deny them permission to compete in Uefa competitions if they want to play tough. I wonder how long their star players will be willing to wait around then?
What they should be doing now is festering on the consequences of their ugly collective ambition because, if they were to leave, the only realistic option, in the short and medium term, is a six-club competition run by and for themselves.
Let them crack on and do it. One of this self-interested cartel can win the league each year, they can be certain of that. They deserve each other’s company. Let them play in an exhibition tournament, touring it around the globe like a warped version of the Harlem Globetrotters.
Let them seek their own television deals, let them try and persuade the richest broadcasters in the world that they do not need the rest of English football to attract a global television audience.
Let them play each other from September to May, the big boys going at each other over and over again for months on end. Let them play in their own competition, where Manchester United can reacquaint themselves with Liverpool roughly once every five weeks.
Let them create a league where the fixtures come round with mundane regularity. Let their dream be to play in football’s equivalent of an American basketball division. 40 games a season against five different opponents. Let them go on tours to the Middle East, the Far East, South America, North America, Australasia and even Antarctica if they so wish.
Let them broadcast every single game on their own websites, let them put every single player up for an interview with their in house media, let them release as many fly-on-the-wall documentaries as they desire. One for each club - glossy, controlled and sanitised - every single year and see how quickly the novelty wears off.
And let the rest of us get on with watching the Premier League, free from their omnipotence, free from their greed.
The results will be far less predictable, the action no less intense, the interest just as widespread, perhaps even more so when you have different teams competing for silverware, different towns and cities celebrating the sort of success they are so intent on denying them their twisted scheme.
There might well be less money sloshing around the Premier League if they go, but they won't. And if they do go, simply promote the top six clubs from the Championship for next season and replace them. They will miss the Premier League when they see how it thrives without them. You can be sure of that. Meanwhile, everyone else - Premier League, Government and the Football Association - can focus on agreeing and delivering a rescue package for the EFL clubs facing financial oblivion in this global pandemic.
Offer them salvation without being forced to back this odious attempt by a group of billionaires to control the top level of English football forever more.
The majority of EFL owners may well back Project Big Picture but they are reacting like a loved one would respond to a ransom note. They all want something they love to survive and any price seems worth paying. Spare them that Hobson's choice and cut the Big Six adrift instead if we must.
There is a wonderful Geordie send-off given to someone who leaves an argument they have already lost. Off you ****. It has never felt more apt
This user liked this post: Zlatan
-
Chester Perry
- Posts: 19379
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3154 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Premier League - Project Big Picture
posted on the MMT thread but works here too
Just what is going on with the leaders of our footballing authorities - Greg Clarke is dumped in the deep end by Rick Parry as Richard Masters emerges unscathed by doing right by his members, though one wonders why he didn't out them at the time - from the Telegraph
Exclusive: FA chief Greg Clarke 'proposed Premier League 2 and B teams' in explosive leaked document
TOM MORGAN OCTOBER 15, 2020
Football Association chairman Greg Clarke has been accused of floating the formation of a 'Premier League 2' and introducing B-teams into the Football League in secret talks with leading clubs.
The Daily Telegraph has seen a copy of a discussion paper apparently part-produced by Clarke ahead of a meeting in February with Liverpool, Manchester United and Bruce Buck, the Chelsea chairman. The proposals emerging from these talks also appear to include a plan to completely overhaul the EFL to combine Leagues One and Two with the three top non-league competitions.
In an explosive new twist to the story that has rocked English football, Rick Parry, the English Football League chairman, is understood to have shared the early draft of Project Big Picture with EFL club executives suggesting it was Clarke that had instigated the controversial proposals.
In an email seen by The Telegraph, Parry appeared to be at pains to clarify his version of events after the FA played a major role in torpedoing PBP following the clandestine plan being unearthed by The Telegraph on Sunday. On Tuesday, Clarke sparked incredulity at Liverpool and Manchester United by publishing a letter accusing the two teams of plotting a breakaway from the Premier League. In a letter to the FA council, Clarke did not specify the date at which talks turned to a breakaway, instead saying it was in “late Spring”. Clarke maintained in his letter that at the mention of a breakaway, he walked away from discussions.
However, in a new email to his EFL colleagues seen by The Daily Telegraph, Parry alleges it was Clarke who "initiated this process" for a major overhaul, with proposals so radical that the EFL would never have been able to accept.
To prove his point, the EFL chief attached a detailed "discussion" document which Clarke had apparently been involved in. Parry goes on to claim Clarke invited him to preliminary talks in February with Bruce Buck, the Chelsea chairman, and representatives of Liverpool and Manchester United.
Richard Masters, the Premier League chief executive, was also invited to participate by Bruce but declined, Parry adds. It is understood that Masters refused to countenance any attendance at an informal meeting that was not officially-constituted and would not include all 20 Premier League shareholders. Masters had also seen no paperwork related to the matter.
An attached document which Parry suggests Clarke authored says: "The devil is in the detail and we need to work through objectives and possible solutions before beginning the herculean task of reshaping English football for the challenges and opportunities ahead."
However, according to the document, "Project Big Picture would seek to restructure the English football pyramid and its leagues and competition" via a series of radical proposals:
- "Elite club football in England is reconfigured to two divisions of 18 clubs nominally called Premier League 1 and 2", he says, "with the objectives of limiting the number of games and establishing common governance, financial regulation and media marketing".
The EFL is "reconfigured to combine Leagues One and Two together with the National League and National League North and South and comprising five divisions".
- The League Cup and FA Cup replays are "discontinued".
Solidarity payments are "reshaped to encourage financial stability in the new EFL and Elite Player Development (EPPP) is limited to Premier League 1 & 2".
- The establishment of Premier League B teams within the EFL is "investigated with the aim of providing truly competitive football to elite young talent and replace the current ad hoc loan system".
- The FA is reshaped to focus "all of its funds on grass roots football and the women’s game"
- The FA Board becomes the forum "where the English game is governed and top level stakeholder representatives attend". "However, stakeholder subsidiarity is maintained with power to run and regulate competitions retained by the leagues."
Parry said in his email to colleagues that following Clarke’s critical letter to the FA Council on PBP, "I think it is necessary to clarify a few points".
"First of all, it was Greg who initiated this process," he wrote. He added that "in the interests of transparency" he was showing them details of document "that Greg produced". "You’ll see that the document highlights the role that the major clubs should play in bringing about change given the alternatives that are open to them," he writes. "He also raises a number of contentious issues such as Premier League Two, B Teams and the exclusion of League One and League Two clubs from EPPP. For the avoidance of any doubt this is not to say that Greg was personally in favour of these ideas but that they warranted discussion."
Parry concludes his letter by saying: "I made it clear from the outset that they some of these were absolute non-starters from an EFL point of view and it is clear that they did not find their way into the Project Big Picture proposal."
"They were firmly rejected by Liverpool and Manchester United which does confirm their understanding of the importance of the pyramid," he adds.
In response to the email, Clarke confirmed to The Daily Telegraph that he was "part of the early discussions which involved a number of Premier League clubs, with the knowledge of senior FA members".
"It is an important part of my job to work together with key stakeholders across the game to discuss and evaluate potential improvements to the structure of English football that would have a positive long-term effect at every level of the game," he said in a statement. "The paper captures a summary of what areas and issues were discussed at an early meeting. I encouraged Premier League and EFL involvement in these discussions for greater transparency across the game. The EFL joined but the Premier League had an interim chair at the time, and the acting CEO made the decision to not attend. Which is understandable given the outbreak of Covid-19 and their focus on league matters."
Details of the alleged memo from Clarke are also likely to be raised as clubs across the EFL tiers discuss whether to accept a new £50 million loans and grants offer from the Premier League for Leagues One and Two only.
That offer was issued after Clarke had played a major role in ensuring proposals led by Parry, United and Liverpool for sweeping changes across football were dead in the water at a meeting of top-tier shareholders on Wednesday.
There had been 18 different drafts of PBP before it was vetoed by the Premier League. As disclosed by The Daily Telegraph on Sunday, the most lucrative sports league in the world would have been reduced to 18 teams, and controlling power would be in the hands of the biggest clubs. In return for tearing up many of the rules that have governed the game since the Premier League's inception in 1992, there would have been a £250m rescue package for the English Football League to see them through the Covid crisis. The Premier League has now announced plans to review the "future structures and financing of English football".
Just what is going on with the leaders of our footballing authorities - Greg Clarke is dumped in the deep end by Rick Parry as Richard Masters emerges unscathed by doing right by his members, though one wonders why he didn't out them at the time - from the Telegraph
Exclusive: FA chief Greg Clarke 'proposed Premier League 2 and B teams' in explosive leaked document
TOM MORGAN OCTOBER 15, 2020
Football Association chairman Greg Clarke has been accused of floating the formation of a 'Premier League 2' and introducing B-teams into the Football League in secret talks with leading clubs.
The Daily Telegraph has seen a copy of a discussion paper apparently part-produced by Clarke ahead of a meeting in February with Liverpool, Manchester United and Bruce Buck, the Chelsea chairman. The proposals emerging from these talks also appear to include a plan to completely overhaul the EFL to combine Leagues One and Two with the three top non-league competitions.
In an explosive new twist to the story that has rocked English football, Rick Parry, the English Football League chairman, is understood to have shared the early draft of Project Big Picture with EFL club executives suggesting it was Clarke that had instigated the controversial proposals.
In an email seen by The Telegraph, Parry appeared to be at pains to clarify his version of events after the FA played a major role in torpedoing PBP following the clandestine plan being unearthed by The Telegraph on Sunday. On Tuesday, Clarke sparked incredulity at Liverpool and Manchester United by publishing a letter accusing the two teams of plotting a breakaway from the Premier League. In a letter to the FA council, Clarke did not specify the date at which talks turned to a breakaway, instead saying it was in “late Spring”. Clarke maintained in his letter that at the mention of a breakaway, he walked away from discussions.
However, in a new email to his EFL colleagues seen by The Daily Telegraph, Parry alleges it was Clarke who "initiated this process" for a major overhaul, with proposals so radical that the EFL would never have been able to accept.
To prove his point, the EFL chief attached a detailed "discussion" document which Clarke had apparently been involved in. Parry goes on to claim Clarke invited him to preliminary talks in February with Bruce Buck, the Chelsea chairman, and representatives of Liverpool and Manchester United.
Richard Masters, the Premier League chief executive, was also invited to participate by Bruce but declined, Parry adds. It is understood that Masters refused to countenance any attendance at an informal meeting that was not officially-constituted and would not include all 20 Premier League shareholders. Masters had also seen no paperwork related to the matter.
An attached document which Parry suggests Clarke authored says: "The devil is in the detail and we need to work through objectives and possible solutions before beginning the herculean task of reshaping English football for the challenges and opportunities ahead."
However, according to the document, "Project Big Picture would seek to restructure the English football pyramid and its leagues and competition" via a series of radical proposals:
- "Elite club football in England is reconfigured to two divisions of 18 clubs nominally called Premier League 1 and 2", he says, "with the objectives of limiting the number of games and establishing common governance, financial regulation and media marketing".
The EFL is "reconfigured to combine Leagues One and Two together with the National League and National League North and South and comprising five divisions".
- The League Cup and FA Cup replays are "discontinued".
Solidarity payments are "reshaped to encourage financial stability in the new EFL and Elite Player Development (EPPP) is limited to Premier League 1 & 2".
- The establishment of Premier League B teams within the EFL is "investigated with the aim of providing truly competitive football to elite young talent and replace the current ad hoc loan system".
- The FA is reshaped to focus "all of its funds on grass roots football and the women’s game"
- The FA Board becomes the forum "where the English game is governed and top level stakeholder representatives attend". "However, stakeholder subsidiarity is maintained with power to run and regulate competitions retained by the leagues."
Parry said in his email to colleagues that following Clarke’s critical letter to the FA Council on PBP, "I think it is necessary to clarify a few points".
"First of all, it was Greg who initiated this process," he wrote. He added that "in the interests of transparency" he was showing them details of document "that Greg produced". "You’ll see that the document highlights the role that the major clubs should play in bringing about change given the alternatives that are open to them," he writes. "He also raises a number of contentious issues such as Premier League Two, B Teams and the exclusion of League One and League Two clubs from EPPP. For the avoidance of any doubt this is not to say that Greg was personally in favour of these ideas but that they warranted discussion."
Parry concludes his letter by saying: "I made it clear from the outset that they some of these were absolute non-starters from an EFL point of view and it is clear that they did not find their way into the Project Big Picture proposal."
"They were firmly rejected by Liverpool and Manchester United which does confirm their understanding of the importance of the pyramid," he adds.
In response to the email, Clarke confirmed to The Daily Telegraph that he was "part of the early discussions which involved a number of Premier League clubs, with the knowledge of senior FA members".
"It is an important part of my job to work together with key stakeholders across the game to discuss and evaluate potential improvements to the structure of English football that would have a positive long-term effect at every level of the game," he said in a statement. "The paper captures a summary of what areas and issues were discussed at an early meeting. I encouraged Premier League and EFL involvement in these discussions for greater transparency across the game. The EFL joined but the Premier League had an interim chair at the time, and the acting CEO made the decision to not attend. Which is understandable given the outbreak of Covid-19 and their focus on league matters."
Details of the alleged memo from Clarke are also likely to be raised as clubs across the EFL tiers discuss whether to accept a new £50 million loans and grants offer from the Premier League for Leagues One and Two only.
That offer was issued after Clarke had played a major role in ensuring proposals led by Parry, United and Liverpool for sweeping changes across football were dead in the water at a meeting of top-tier shareholders on Wednesday.
There had been 18 different drafts of PBP before it was vetoed by the Premier League. As disclosed by The Daily Telegraph on Sunday, the most lucrative sports league in the world would have been reduced to 18 teams, and controlling power would be in the hands of the biggest clubs. In return for tearing up many of the rules that have governed the game since the Premier League's inception in 1992, there would have been a £250m rescue package for the English Football League to see them through the Covid crisis. The Premier League has now announced plans to review the "future structures and financing of English football".