middleeastdave Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 The article in todays Scotland on Sunday from Richard Bath is the most sensible I have heard in years and sounds very logic that we go back to the days when every game the clubs split the proceeds OK it was 50/50 back in the good old days but I am sure Motherwell will survive on the 60/40 split. I am not so sure the O.F. Hearts, Aberdeen and Hibs would agree but it certainly would improve standards in the SPL, I am sure of that. I would also think that away supporters would attend more matches knowing that some of their money is heading back to the away teams coffers!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brazilian Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 not seen the article yet but I'm always wary of the split gates being proposed for league matches the club are already portraying a doomsday scenario when one other club failed what would happen to a budget where we relying on Celtic and Hearts supporters attending and they didn't for whatever reason...poor form...boycott.... transport/weather problems....we vote against them on an issue...etc I think I prefer the club being responsible for boosting our own gates and receiving the rewards longer term we're in enough crap living off others as it is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Never going to happen simply because crowds would reduce - Celtics average attendance would be, ahem, 15,000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 I agree with it entirely, we need something radical to shake things up. On the point of relying on others, we'd be relying on every other team rather than just one or two, so might not be that risky. Aint done the maths though. The key in boosting attendances is away fans I'd say, and equal gate splits would be the best way to encourage that. Clubs would be more inclined to run busses and encourage fans to get to away games aswell as home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bomjac Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Never gonna happen, period. So lets just forget about it and move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inthebasement Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 If rangers go to the third, or even the first, this should be forced through immediatly. It would be in the interests of eleven of the twelve clubs and therefore correct. And it would tranform our game. Celtic would go into melt down, but as they have made it clear on countless occasions that scotland holds them back and they wish to leave, they have no moral standing on such matters - they can take the rules which suit the majority, or leave. I also do not agree that the celtic support would collapse, but if it did so be it, the wealth of the old firm is the problem in our game, not it's great strength. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoF Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 It would certainly change our game for the better. Despite their predictable objections Celtic would get the competition they apparently crave and the league would be far far far healthier. That said, I'm not too comfortable with the idea. At a time where we're banging on about the integrity of the sport it seems unfair that clubs should reap benefits that aren't a result of their own on field success. Still not sure on this one. Here's a link to the article by the way. Quite a compelling case.... http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/sport/richard-bath-most-successful-era-when-gate-receipts-were-split-equitably-1-2386654 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roly Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 If rangers go to the third, or even the first, this should be forced through immediatly. It would be in the interests of eleven of the twelve clubs and therefore correct. And it would tranform our game. Just to debunk this... average spl away attendances and average spl home attendances Acorrding to those stats Hearts would have lost out if this was in place last season. That was WITH the team formerly known a Rangers in the league. Without them Aberdeen and Hibs would probably lose income too... Therfore not in their interests. 50-50 gate split in my opinion will never be a workable proposition. I'd like to see a pooling of gate money though. Something like the SFA taking 5% to 10% of all gate reciepts. At the end of the season half of that is added to the prize monies (which DO need to be more evenly distributed) the other half is pumped back in the the game to help improve that standards of football in this country. Unfortunatly this will never happen too. Chairmen will be too scared to lose vital money they need to help with cash flow issues. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roly Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 http://www.scotsman....tably-1-2386654 Comparing the fooballing landscape now to that of the glory days really gets my goat... Even the comparson with the 14% drop in the past decade is risable. 08/09 saw an average attendance of over 15,000 in the spl. Fast forward a year of rescession and almost 2000 people a week are lost to the game. The long-term, 50-year picture is of shrinking attendances across Scottish football And this... Why did we see an increase of almost 200 people per game on average this year? That with 2 big city clubs (Hibs and Aberdeen) seeing fairly dramatic attendance drops due to poor performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatcalf Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 It would certainly change our game for the better. Despite their predictable objections Celtic would get the competition they apparently crave and the league would be far far far healthier. That said, I'm not too comfortable with the idea. At a time where we're banging on about the integrity of the sport it seems unfair that clubs should reap benefits that aren't a result of their own on field success. Still not sure on this one. Here's a link to the article by the way. Quite a compelling case.... http://www.scotsman....tably-1-2386654 I have always held the belief that switching to keeping home gate receipts was a bad move and one which hindered the diddy clubs. I will always back a move back but perhaps a share of the profits would be a fairer move rather than a straight 50-50 split. The Scottish Cup is a prime example, split receipts still operate for these games, it takes two teams to play a game and both should be rewarded for participation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yabba's Turd Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Go one step further and pool all the profits and distribute evenly brother Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roly Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Go one step further and pool all the profits and distribute evenly brother What about one more step? Pool all profits from every Scottish league game (spl and sfl 1, 2 and 3). Then distribute evenly. Do you feel the same way about Motherwell subsidising Ablion Rovers and Montrose as you do about Celtic and Hearts subsidising Motherwell? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yabba's Turd Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 What about one more step? Pool all profits from every Scottish league game (spl and sfl 1, 2 and 3). Then distribute evenly. Do you feel the same way about Motherwell subsidising Ablion Rovers and Montrose as you do about Celtic and Hearts subsidising Motherwell? Why not do it by division? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roly Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Why not do it by division? Because the only reason this comes up about the SPL is because of the vast difference between the Old firms attendances and the rest of us. It's a non-issue for every other division in Scotland. The difference in the spread of wealth in SFL 1, 2 and 3 would be negligible. Anyway. You didn't answer the question. Motherwell funding The Wee Rovers and and The Gable Endies? For or against? Celtic make vast amounts more money from sponsorship and merchandising than anyone else too. Should we be laying some kind of claim on that too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Celtic make vast amounts more money from sponsorship and merchandising than anyone else too. Should we be laying some kind of claim on that too? The NFL and MLB over here do exactly that (albeit through slightly different mechanisms). Not because they are pinko liberal commies, but because the owners realised that by keeping teams closer to parity the increased competitiveness of the leagues brings in more spectators, which results in more tv coverage and sponsorship which results in even more money to share between the teams. TV alone is worth more than $20 billion to the NFL teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roly Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 The NFL and MLB over here do exactly that (albeit through slightly different mechanisms). Not because they are pinko liberal commies, but because the owners realised that by keeping teams closer to parity the increased competitiveness of the leagues brings in more spectators, which results in more tv coverage and sponsorship which results in even more money to share between the teams. TV alone is worth more than $20 billion to the NFL teams. I'm aware of that. It's an apples and pears argument though. Similar to the one trotted out about the price of German football in relation to prices over here. In a nation of 300,000,000 big money is easier to generate and neither of those sports have the kind of competition the Scottish game has from other European football leagues when it come to broadcasters thrashing out tv deals. I'm sure it's not without it's problems too though. I only have a passing interest but I'm sure there was a big player revolt not too long ago that had its seeds in the way money was carved up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 I'm aware of that. It's an apples and pears argument though. Similar to the one trotted out about the price of German football in relation to prices over here. It's not really apples and oranges. The amounts may be different, but there is nothing to prevent the SPL from distributing the TV revenue on an more equal basis. The price of German football may not be directly available to the SPL or the SFA, but their financial model is one that should be copied across all European countries. IT would certainly have prevented the Rangers debacle. In a nation of 300,000,000 big money is easier to generate and neither of those sports have the kind of competition the Scottish game has from other European football leagues when it come to broadcasters thrashing out tv deals. Again - it's not amount the amounts involved, it's about the financial models that have been adopted. I'm sure it's not without it's problems too though. I only have a passing interest but I'm sure there was a big player revolt not too long ago that had its seeds in the way money was carved up. The money carve up was only a small part of it. It was just the normal negotiations when the players' union collective bargaining agreement expired and had to be renegotiated. Most of the financials were agreed, there was just some dispute over one slice of the $20 billion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roly Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 It's not really apples and oranges. The amounts may be different, but there is nothing to prevent the SPL from distributing the TV revenue on an more equal basis. Totally agree regarding TV money distribution... At the end of the season half of that is added to the prize monies (which DO need to be more evenly distributed) The price of German football may not be directly available to the SPL or the SFA, but their financial model is one that should be copied across all European countries. IT would certainly have prevented the Rangers debacle. Agree with this too. Its important to note the Bundesliga financial model isn't achieved by sharing gate reciepts or merchendising revenue though. The money carve up was only a small part of it. It was just the normal negotiations when the players' union collective bargaining agreement expired and had to be renegotiated. Most of the financials were agreed, there was just some dispute over one slice of the $20 billion. Fair enough. For me this is the real reason for the competitivness of the NFL. Gate reciepts and merchindising is probably reasonably small fry in comparison to that massive TV deal and sponsorship and one which the biggest franchises won't miss. There's probably nowhere near the disparity we have in Scotland in terms of gates too. Celtic wouldn't be far off having an average attendance of 10 times that of the rests average, they'd be giving away a hell of a lot more than the best supported teams in the NFL do. The draft and the salary cap is a much bigger leveller. Do you think it could be implemented in Scottish football? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inthebasement Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Just to debunk this... average spl away attendances and average spl home attendances Acorrding to those stats Hearts would have lost out if this was in place last season. That was WITH the team formerly known a Rangers in the league. Without them Aberdeen and Hibs would probably lose income too... Therfore not in their interests. Interesting stats but are you sure that it would not be in the interests of hearts as the second biggest club in the league to severely weaken the biggest club? Are there any knock on effects of hearts being able to challenge celtic which might feed into the financial wellbeing of the club? In any case, even on your debunk analysis, it would be in the interests on 8 of the clubs and that will make it correct in terms of the new voting system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roly Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 Interesting stats but are you sure that it would not be in the interests of hearts as the second biggest club in the league to severely weaken the biggest club? Are there any knock on effects of hearts being able to challenge celtic which might feed into the financial wellbeing of the club? I doubt it. Merchandising and sponsorship should help keep Celtic way ahead of the competition financially anyway. It would also be in the interests of the other clubs to try and handicap Celtic in other ways. Maybe we could see if we could push through a measure for them to start each season with -15 points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatcalf Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 What about one more step? Pool all profits from every Scottish league game (spl and sfl 1, 2 and 3). Then distribute evenly. Do you feel the same way about Motherwell subsidising Ablion Rovers and Montrose as you do about Celtic and Hearts subsidising Motherwell? You know something, I would. Yes fair's fair the whole game should be looked after IMO. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well_Jaggy Posted July 4, 2012 Report Share Posted July 4, 2012 ok, hows this for shits and giggles. Every club in the league should start on minus the number of point they were ahead of their closest rivals from the previous season. Celtic were 20 ahead of rangers, so start on -20 Motherwell were 3 points ahead of DUFC so start on -3 and so on. ok, its not practical or possibly fair, but it would make for an interesting season! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well Up For It! Posted July 5, 2012 Report Share Posted July 5, 2012 I'm in favour of split gates, but maybe more along the lines of 80/20 split. I'm sure there would be less opposition to that. Maybe there's a case to put the 20% into a pot that gets split evenly between the 12 teams at the end of the season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brazilian Posted July 5, 2012 Report Share Posted July 5, 2012 I said already I dont think split gates can be achieved, although 80/20 may be possible but the admin costs might make it not as worthwhile BUT taking any money away from clubs and paying it out at the end of the season will force many of them into an insolvency event clubs need money in asap St Mirren are getting desperate for last seasons SPL money to be paid out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted July 16, 2012 Report Share Posted July 16, 2012 I agree completely that the television money should be split more evenly, but it's all too easy to say that we want a share of the gate money when our average attendance sees us ranked seventh in a league of twelve. Even if this was brought up for a vote under a new democratic system I doubt we'd see positive responses from the likes of Celtic, Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs or Dundee United. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.