Paid Members Ron Simmons Posted August 3, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 3, 2011 Ron... with a more competitive league... do you not think broadcasters would be more likely to pay more? It would depend on WHY the league's competitive. It would have to be because the other teams are getting better, not because the Old Firm are getting worse. Â And the only way that'll happen is if we get more money. That's not going to happen if our top two teams (and thus the rest of the league) are getting worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Minipops Posted August 3, 2011 Share Posted August 3, 2011 Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bettencourt Posted August 3, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 3, 2011 It would depend on WHY the league's competitive. It would have to be because the other teams are getting better, not because the Old Firm are getting worse. And the only way that'll happen is if we get more money. That's not going to happen if our top two teams (and thus the rest of the league) are getting worse.  So... you're saying the only way for our whole league to improve is for Rangers and Celtic to get their Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Ron Simmons Posted August 3, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 3, 2011 So... you're saying the only way for our whole league to improve is for Rangers and Celtic to get their Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cum Doctor Posted August 3, 2011 Share Posted August 3, 2011 The problem is that the domestic TV deal doesn't help either. And yes, I totally understand the "Rangers and Celtic are the teams that people want to beat", but even the Old Firm have bleated on about competition, but when the idea of a more even money share is brought up, it suddenly becomes a non-issue. It would help though. Obviously not totally even and the OF should get the majority, but there needs to be something to give the other clubs at least a chance. Unless that happens, and the OF continue to get more Euro money, then the gulf will be there and that means that the competition won't be there and the OF will be even more ill equipped for Europe than they are now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members martyngnr Posted August 3, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 3, 2011 The problem is that the domestic TV deal doesn't help either. And yes, I totally understand the "Rangers and Celtic are the teams that people want to beat", but even the Old Firm have bleated on about competition, but when the idea of a more even money share is brought up, it suddenly becomes a non-issue. It would help though. Obviously not totally even and the OF should get the majority, but there needs to be something to give the other clubs at least a chance. Unless that happens, and the OF continue to get more Euro money, then the gulf will be there and that means that the competition won't be there and the OF will be even more ill equipped for Europe than they are now. The usual excuse of why they do so poorly in Europe is that they aren't used to regularly facing competitive opposition. The fans may complain that the "diddy" teams just aren't a challenge, but would they be happy to be in a situation where they aren't winning every single game easily? In fact, for the answer just look at the number of dedicated season ticket holders who turned up at the arse end of Mowbray's time in charge at Celtic when they didn't have a hope of winning the league and then went in the huff because they're not happy when not winning 3 or 4 nil every game. Teams were competing with them and they didn't like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bettencourt Posted August 3, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 3, 2011 That's not what I said at all. Read my answer again.   As unfitfinlay asked you previously, do you really think broadcasters would pay more money for an inferior product, even if it was more competitive? Like it or not, the only way the quality can be high is through European success. The Old Firm are our best hope of this. If they do well it opens up more qualifying spots, and also could mean our teams have to endure less qualifying matches until they square off against the big teams. The importance and financial value of, for example, a match against Bayern Munich for Aberdeen is huge. The better our sides do the more likely good players are to join our non-Old Firm sides, whether that's on loan or as part of a permanent deal. The incentive of potentially being able to play against these huge teams is something we COULD offer to compensate for our current lack of finances compare to...for example...Doncaster.  It's not an ideal situation, but we really do need the Old Firm to do well for the rest to follow suit.  Players that are interested in coming to play for the non-old firm sides... until the old firm offer them more money!  FFS. Old Firm getting into the latter stages of the Euro competitions is not going to help the LEAGUE at all. Prolonged Financial and Footballing dominence from the old firm is not going to help the league one little bit.  Let me ask this. In England, with the top 4 getting weaker, dropping points to smaller teams, do you not think that is more of a prospect to viewers and more entertaining to watch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reznor Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 The usual excuse of why they do so poorly in Europe is that they aren't used to regularly facing competitive opposition. The fans may complain that the "diddy" teams just aren't a challenge, but would they be happy to be in a situation where they aren't winning every single game easily? In fact, for the answer just look at the number of dedicated season ticket holders who turned up at the arse end of Mowbray's time in charge at Celtic when they didn't have a hope of winning the league and then went in the huff because they're not happy when not winning 3 or 4 nil every game. Teams were competing with them and they didn't like it. If you're upset at the lack of money coming your way and need to blame someone else, then rather than the big bad Old Firm, I'd suggest you have a look at the other 9 teams who screwed everyone out of a fortune when they rejected the Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Ron Simmons Posted August 4, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 4, 2011 Players that are interested in coming to play for the non-old firm sides... until the old firm offer them more money! FFS. Old Firm getting into the latter stages of the Euro competitions is not going to help the LEAGUE at all. Prolonged Financial and Footballing dominence from the old firm is not going to help the league one little bit.  Let me ask this. In England, with the top 4 getting weaker, dropping points to smaller teams, do you not think that is more of a prospect to viewers and more entertaining to watch? The top 4 AREN't getting weaker in England. You're pretty much ignoring the main point I'm making, which is that our league getting more competitive through a weakened Old Firm is absolutely NOT going to make us more money, it's insane to even suggest it! Like it or not, broadcasters in Sky aren't paying to show Dundee United, Aberdeen or Caley, they're paying to broadcast the Old Firm, and part of what impacts our league's value is the quality of player the two have - for example, there was much more incentive for neutrals to tune in to watch a Celtic side featuring Henrik Larsson and co that had just reached a UEFA final than to tune in and see an even weaker version of the current Old Firm sides. If the football quality's shit, why bother? A good whack of our value is the quality of Old Firm derby, like it or not.  Now, a more competitive league through the non-OF sides getting better? OF COURSE that's a good thing. But a more open league through a poor quality OF is a disaster - broadcasters would be paying for a LOWER quality of football!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bettencourt Posted August 4, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 4, 2011 The top 4 AREN't getting weaker in England. You're pretty much ignoring the main point I'm making, which is that our league getting more competitive through a weakened Old Firm is absolutely NOT going to make us more money, it's insane to even suggest it! Like it or not, broadcasters in Sky aren't paying to show Dundee United, Aberdeen or Caley, they're paying to broadcast the Old Firm, and part of what impacts our league's value is the quality of player the two have - for example, there was much more incentive for neutrals to tune in to watch a Celtic side featuring Henrik Larsson and co that had just reached a UEFA final than to tune in and see an even weaker version of the current Old Firm sides. If the football quality's shit, why bother? A good whack of our value is the quality of Old Firm derby, like it or not. Now, a more competitive league through the non-OF sides getting better? OF COURSE that's a good thing. But a more open league through a poor quality OF is a disaster - broadcasters would be paying for a LOWER quality of football!!!  Yes, but my point is, a leagues quality rising can't be based just on it's co-efficient. You have to take in, finances, bigger teams being able to poach our best players for free/next to nothing. Good players will rarely want to come to Scotland on a pittance unless they are in a really bad situation and desperate for a move, no matter if they are playing two games against an eastern european side or not!  Also Reznor has a great point about the Sky thing. I still cannot believe we took the Setanta deal. Ooh more upfront. That's just the short sightedness by the smaller clubs chairmen that has got Scottish football into the mess it has!  Also, I heard the other day that the SPL is planning on trying to negotiate another new UK Broadcast rights deal away from Sky/ESPN. Remember the last time we did that? We ended up with the BBC Coverage which generated very little revenue. Stupid plan in my opinion. As much as some people despise Sky, there in NOT a better platform to have your nation's football covered on, even if we do play second fiddle to England! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted August 4, 2011 Author Share Posted August 4, 2011 So Rangers only qualify for the Champions League every year because of "sectarian appeal" ? Your statement didn't even make sense. No, both they & Celtic consistently win the league title because they have more money than the rest, primarily because they get 50,000 & 60,000 fans through the gate every 2nd week and sell shitloads of merchandise throughout the country. Their popularity is based on Celtic being the Catholic club and Rangers being the Protestant club. Â Without that sectarian factor they would be as popular as Hearts & Hibs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaka Demus Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 Without that sectarian factor they would be as popular as Hearts & Hibs. Â Based on what exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cogitoergozoomo Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 Based on what exactly? Â I would like to know as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted August 4, 2011 Author Share Posted August 4, 2011 Based on what exactly? You think there would be 110,000 football fans in Glasgow who would support the old firm without the religious aspect to it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaka Demus Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 You think there would be 110,000 football fans in Glasgow who would support the old firm without the religious aspect to it? Â Â Why not? It's the biggest, most populated city in Scotland. Whta you are basically saying is that rangers and Celtic wouldn't be as well supported without sectarianism. What about the two big clubs in every other city? Manchester, Milan? Why are they the two biggest clubs? Â Success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.