If less games allow us to challenge better for the league and Europe then I would be in favour of it. I honestly can’t see the attraction of travelling over to watch a patched up team play in a League Cup game on a Tuesday night. The only teams against this are the yo-yo clubs like Norwich,Fulham, etc. who miss out on the parachute payments. To me it makes more sense to give more voting power to the clubs that drive the interest and revenue in the league. Why should the likes of Fulham have an equal voting right on the future direction of the league when more than likely they will only be in the league for a year. If things stay as they are, there will only be a Premier League and Championship with everything else gone non-league.
Part of me thinks this was leaked on purpose at the weekend to take the heat of the clubs over the PPV news last week. Take focus off that and get a feel for what the response will be like. I don’t think it would have been linked without the PPV news. Following American Sports for a whole, a gesture like this would been seen as heroic as basically potentially saving league clubs going to the wall. We though this side of the pond are more cynical and can see it for what it is long term.
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/spo...-beane-19097486.amp?__twitter_impression=true Must watch Money Ball again
Not a chance the owners wouldn't have known what the reaction would be to this plan.Greg Clarke stopped talks with them a while back,telling them it was a power grab but even without that,they're not stupid and you'd have to be to not realise that would be the accusation. I think Rick Parry leaked it in the hope public/media outrage would draw some more concessions while at the same time speeding up the process because the EFL clubs are desperate for the money at this stage,some are saying they can only survive for 4 or 5 more weeks. I'd imagine our owners wouldn't be too happy about the way it leaked because as far as anybody is concerned now,it's ours and ManU's plan. It would be quite the gesture to take the heat off 17 other PL clubs by placing themselves in the firing line over another issue,especially since the PPV issue will be smack bang back in the spotlight as soon as the first games come round. Can't see it myself.
I can see why the lesser clubs in the PL don't like this as the fear of relegation accelerates more when the parachute payments are gone. We mustn't forget these clubs benefit too from the marketing tool that is the PL with the TV money etc, maybe they should cut their cloth to suit rather than moaning as i haven't seen them coming up wit alternatives. I'm all for cutting PL teams to 18, getting rid of lg Cup, although I do feel getting rid of the charity shield is nothing but a way of getting more time on the foreign pre season games. The bigger play for this has to be the CL being made bigger, if that what it takes to help liverpool become a bigger superpower im all for it, as selfish as it sounds.
I see 'Project big picture' has been shelved anyway after yesterdays emergency meeting. Does anyone realistically see the top clubs looking to break away?
European Premier League anyone? Had a feeling that proposals last week were a smokescreen for something else
So are klopps quotes on the transfers both last nite and today, show that despite what people think he has no or little say on transfers?
He has as much say as most managers I reckon. If he wants a player, he asks upstairs and they tell him yes or no. I think the days of "there's 100mill in the transfer kitty...buy whoever you want" are long gone.
It was interesting what Klopp said, in the interview after the (Spurs) game, he seemed more open to bringing a defender in. He basically said that if the right player at the right price was found, he'd have an interest... That sounded very different to what he was saying 7-14 days ago, so I wonder if he's now been given a little spending money?
FSG looking to pay in installments is the rumour for alot of the transfers. Can't blame them if money is extremely tight.
Are installments not the norm in most transfers? I know you hear it regularly that a club is insisting on a cash payment but I had understood it was more the minority than the majority of transfers that operated like this.
Yeah installments would be the norm but also a percentage up front too. I would imagine they are trying to go with all installments
We must be under some serious cash restraints if that is the case, no doubt the other club involved will resist this very strongly as I'm sure there are few clubs around at the moment that aren't under pressure on their cash reserves but maybe a guarantee of something down the line is better for them than nothing at all.
Yes in hindsight it was wrong not replacing Lovren. It was a gamble and it's one we've lost. So we either have a situation of one of the below imo A - The manager and staff want a realistic CB signing given the emergency situation but the owners are not financing. B - Have identified one, or a few, have the ownerships backing and are playing this to the very last minute. C - Have decided just like VvD, no alternative will do, we wait for our man and get him in the summer. D - We wait for our man, but have kindly asked the owners given the current crisis in CB options to finance an emergency break glass signing. There is so many factors at play here with Covid, player availability, wheeling and dealing, etc etc, but I really hope we are not in a scenario where it's listed above as (A) because that borders on negligence from the owners and could potentially do serious damage to the manager/ownership relationship and we should all be concerned. Here's hoping it's (D) and a reincarnated Klavan is holding a scarf up on Monday.