Mark, football (the real type) is different to the Americanized version. Football players grow like spuds all over the world, not just in England. So unless the FA break off from UEFA and FIFA, and only promote/employ FA youth players to the national leagues your ’pitch’ is broken. And we’ll all be vvying for the 17th spot to pick up the next Walcott (as if the club who nurtured him up would give him up so easily to the FA drafting system). 18th to 20th and you’re relegated so that’s no good.

I see your point but the US system is not the way to go. How about a cap on billionaire owners? Or clubs without billionaires should be relegated? Or even a European Super League?

Mark, nice in theory, but remember this;

1) The turkeys NEVER vote for Christmas.

2) The Golden Rule... Them that has the gold makes the rules.

The problem, since the Sky-era of football commenced, has been that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

We’ve just about hung on to the coat-tails of the big boys, in that we haven’t done a Sheffield Wednesday or a Nottingham Forest. But it’s the fact that so much cash goes to the top 3 or 4 teams in England and very little finds its way in to the lesser clubs. If you’re a Premiership club, the Sky money is a big plus, but compare the top of the Premiership with the bottom and there is a huge disparity.

Money needs to be evened out throughout football, not just in the Premiership. Above all, not just in the Premiership Remember when gate receipts for cup games were split between the home and visiting teams? A small club only needed a fixture at a side from the top flight and they had a massive cash injection.

Football is no longer the game that I grew up with. I was growing up in the era of Southall, Reid, Sharpy and Ratcliffe. They actually gave a shit when they played for Everton or their country and they were the norm. Now if you get a player that actually gives a fuck like Cahill, they suddenly become gold dust.

One point that I don’t agree on is the draft picks. The academy system in England is a good one and Everton have done pretty well out of theirs over the years. What Everton need to do is to get a partnership with a foreign club. Just for example, a top-end division 2 or low-end division 1 Belgian or Dutch side and send our most promising youngsters over there to learn a different style from the English game for a year or 2. I’m sure that would help their development far more than playing a handful of bullshit reserve games.

The American system wouldn't work work, we just do'nt have the set-up, and like someone said, footballers come from all over the world and not just the USA! However, other rules could be put in and made to come into effect in just a few years i.e limit to how much clubs can spend on wages (and I don't mean link it to annual turnover cos that would make no difference) or put a limit on the net amount that clubs can spend on transfers. Even if it was something like £60 million, a few prem clubs couldn't raise this and would still hold a little advantage for the bigger clubs, but nothing like what it is now! Can't see it happening though because Fifa, Uefa and G14 (or whatever it is now), simply don't want to!

And they want to go further.
When you play fantasy league football with the mirror, sun, etc etc.
If your a Chelsea or Man city fan, you get 100 mill to spend. Others 20 mill.

Good one Colin. So if I pick Everton, do I only get 15 minutes before the deadline to pick my players, rush down to London to attempt to overrule a court case, and then to only pick from a pool of Manure rejects??

I've thought the same for a while... I don't understand the enjoyment that fans of the top 4 get out of football, when they know deep down that they will likely win each game/league/cup.

In a way I wish the top 4 would leave and go play in some superleague. I just think it's a joke that each season it's a battle for the best of the rest... competing for 5th!!!! Pisses me off even more when you get the odd fluke result and then the BBC and SKY rave on about the prem being the best league in the world.

The NFL system is good in many ways but it will not work here for the reasons stated in the previous posts.
Prize Money for League position is allocated the higher you are the more money you get. Surely they are the teams that don’t need the money. The lower teams need the help to buy better players and become better. The premier league is now a turn off for me. England is a tapping up shop.
I have followed my blues all my life but football now sickens me. Money rules all.

I like the NFL both as a game and how it is set up. I wish the premier league changes its ways or it will lose more fans each year.

I wonder would this sentiment still be apparent if we actually had money.


I doubt it.

As for your illegal suggestions....well , what can I say. Ridiculous.

And another point..We often hear about the good old days of Everton ? early seventies...mid eighties...

Need I remind those people berating teams with money on this thread that we were the ones spending big money of players in those days.

If there was no-one raising the bar, then there?d be no set level to aspire to!

And to say the Premier League is boring is absolutely codswallop.

Just would not work. Could you imagine the premier league bringing those rules when the Spanish and Italian clubs could still buy anyone. Could not see the EPL penalising themselves and weakening the big clubs as then the Champions League would not be won by English clubs.

Ciaran, you say..

"Need I remind those people berating teams with money on this thread that we were the ones spending big money of players in those days..."

I’ve seen people mention this before and the fact is it is a staggeringly simplistic comparison and (therefore) a total red herring.

If someone had £10 in savings and someone else a £1,000,000, you wouldn’t suggest they’re both the same because they both have savings (would you?)

It’s a matter of degrees.

When we were the ’Mersey Millionaires’ we had access to a few grand more than say Stoke, but that didn’t allow us to have an international in every position PLUS a ’reserve’ team full of internationals, PLUS allow us to pay them all twice (three times) as much as they could make everywhere else. We also couldn’t afford to lose large amounts of money when selling players on, without batting an eye-lid.

When we played Chelsea in the Carling SF, we gave them a decent(ish) game for the most part..but lost.

When they beat us 3-2 at Goodison, we gave them a VERY good game....but lost.

Why - because they had better training facilities?

A better crowd?

A Better physio?

No because they had more pace and a better touch.

And WHY did they have more pace and a better touch?

They bought it.

Fact: They had £300 mil on the park, we had £27 mill

I’m not saying you MUST have zillions to put together a decent side (eg: Liege, Villareal) or that it’s not possible for us to get a result now and again against wealthier sides.

However all logic AND THE FACTS tell us it’s unlikely and that in the current ’Premier’ League, ONLY a team that spends regularly and big has any chance of winning the title.

And when you think about it, to be playing in a league you DEFINITELY can’t win is just......erm...odd.

Yes we did have money in the late 70’s and early eighties and circumstances stopped us becoming a european powerhouse. But that money was local money. Money from a fan of the club. Jack Walker at Blackburn did the same. He went to the club man and boy and if i was in the same position I would do the same for Everton as we all would.
But football in general , at the moment, is not in a good way.
Refereeing decisions - More and more controversy.
Red cards recinded for some and not for others.
Match pricing so that not all fans can see a game.
Need I go on.......
But then comes that golden nugget ... 3-0 against the shite. 7 -1 against sunderland and everything is rosey.

A BLUE now and always.......

It would have to be across the whole world of football if new rules were to come in. Not just the English fa making life harder for english clubs. Also, all this ?undisclosed fee? rubbish would have to stop, why are most fees undisclosed nowadays? It's not like they don't have to tell the tax man how much they are spending, so why cant they tell the fans? The amount of loopholes the ?big 4? would find would be unbelievable too!

EJ,

Can I suggest introducing a degree of temporal relativity to your example... Maybe then your refutation may have merit. As it stands, it doesn?t.

We were the big spenders in those days and that is what the argument is about ? other teams having more resources that put them in a superior position in regards to attracting and paying for players ? irrespective of the degree or relativity of those resources.

It is about top dog.

The fact that we were once that top dog is not a ?red herring? ? that is a historical fact.

Completley agree Mark and I think UEFA will soon be forced to act because the Prem League top 4 have dominated our league for 10 years. Now with tons of money being given to them they will soon start dominating the whole of European football. Last season having 3 English teams in the Euro Semis will not be a one off. Then the FAs of all the other european leagues will create a big enough fuss to perhaps kick UEFA into doing some of the proposals you have stated.

Though the top 4 is bad for the game, and the FA certainly have an interest in protecting it, there was nothing illegal about it coming to be.
6 teams would challenge for the 3 CL places in the early part of this decade (Arsenal and Utd always qualified, the shite, the chavs, Leeds and Newcastle would swap each year for qualification).
The season Leeds and Newcastle impolded the 3 places was expanded to 4 and the teams who were at best 7th couldn’t make up the ground and therefor the top 4 came to be.
UEFA can’t do a thing about it... unless they wanted to only give a max of 2 places per league, or even go back to the old European Cup... but that wont happen will it.

Tommy, UEFA may do something to prevent the English clubs dominating in European cups, but it wouldn’t affect the EPL as the Top 4 will still be the most popular and the English FA and Sky will want to keep them 4 at the top. they bring in the most viewership among all the English clubs, it’s not exactly in their best interest to create a level playing field.

i’m sure they’re happy with the status quo, with the odd upstart club, like us, trying to break thru every now and then. never truly threatening anything but keeping things just interesting enough that fans will keep watching the next season in case something new happens.

Only when the sky 4 are struggling to compete with the new era of Billionaires will they decide to change it to make it more competitive.

It?s not Sky that are to blame.
Their system is pretty equitable with most clubs guaranteed £25 million and about £0.75 million per place in the league.

It is the Uefa CL that is totally inequitable with huge sums for the group stages and finalists.

Now if that money was spread more evenly across all the clubs qualifying for European football we would IMO see a gradual change.

Ciaran, two things.

First you say...

"Can I suggest introducing a degree of temporal relativity to your example...Maybe then your refutation may have merit"

Of COURSE you can! (and good look with your mocks!)

You continue..

"We were the big spenders in those days and that is what the argument is about - other teams having more resources that put them in a superior position in regards to attracting and paying for players - irrespective of the degree or relativity of those resources.

"Irrespective of the degree?"

Wrong!

It is ALL about degree - that’s why I’m not worried if a team has £700,000 more than Everton, but am when it’s £700,000,000 more (see the difference?)

It is NOT about other teams having ’more’ resources, it is about other teams have fucking LOOOOOOADS more resources.

Anyway, I have explained so a 10 year old can understand.

If you want to keep repeating the same stuff, so you can convince yourself you’re ’right’, fill your boots.

Lost interest in all things top flight quite some time ago. Would rather be competing with real clubs week-in, week-out. Better if top 4 just FUCKED OFF to play with their bum chums and bottom friends in Europe. Give me every Saturday at 3, cheap pies, £1 programme, standing u,p and a fiver to get in.

Cheerio!

EJ,

Perhaps you can explain (in terms a 10-year-old can understand, of course) where the magic cut off point occurs in this little paradigm of yours?

Whether a team has £700k more or £700M more, they still have an advantage... the player you're after will still go to the other team - he won?t go ?more? to thee other team.


You too, seem to be repeating the same stuff, which I consider to be false ? or do your fancy rules not apply to yourself?

No Ciaran, I won’t explain again and there is no ’magic cut of point’

One just has to use a little brains and a little imagination.

If you genuinely don’t see the difference and/or you genuinely need further explanation, god love (and help) you.

EJ, you're wasting your time with Ciaran, mister confrontational. If you said something was white, he?d say it was black. I agree though, I do think he?s quite young. He must be a pain in the arse to his mum and dad as well. At least we can just log off.

Bloody Hell, Is Ciaran McGoon on here causing trouble too, he just can?t help himself can he.

Surely he must be going through puberty and is angry at the world, let?s cut him some slack eh guys!!!

Does anybody know if he has EVER agreed with a post in the history of TW?????

Answers on a postcard.

Too many people will not face up to our past.

In the 1960s we decimated Scottish and Lancashire football. We took Alex Parker, Tommy Ring , Alex Scott, Jimmy Gabriel and Alex Young from Scotland in a little over 12 months. Lancashire clubs lost Gordon West, Alan Ball, Roy Vernon, Howard Kendall and Dennis Stevens. Yorkshire lost Tony Kay, and Ray Wilson. Blackpool were relegated and have never returned to the top flight.

Did we feel guilty... did we hell, we loved every minute; after 15 years of post-war mediocrity, we were Champions, bought and paid for with money we had not earned on the field.

Like it or not, only Chelsea of the Sky 4 are in the same position. Arsenal, Man U and Liverpool receive no money from millionaire owners and built there status by their results and a history of good management on and off the field. The difference in spending between us and LFC is entirely accounted for by the money they earn by results in the Champions League and not from some Yank playing benevolent sugar daddy. We have squandered by poor managent two great opportunities to ensure that that money was going to us and not them.
Somebody said turkeys don?t vote for Christmas but we were one of the 4 major players in engineering the breakaway from the Football league to establish thr Premier League and take with it all the TV money previously shared with the 92. The difference is that other clubs had the management with the ability to make the most of the opportunity presented whilst we sat back and did sweet FA.
So there you have it.. EFC the first turkey to vote for Xmas.

Richard Parker

That is a superb idea pal it would ensure that our promising youngsters get more first team football in a competitive league instead of wasting in the reserves

Can we make sure David Moyes sees that as soon as possible

Evertons League championship in 62-63 was not down to a multi millionaire buying players for them. The AVERAGE gate for that season was over 52,000, with gates of 60+ and 70+ thousand also that season. John Moores did not put a penny of his own money into Everton, as he said in "The Golden Vision" every person who attends a match @ Everton over the 32,000 break even figure is profit for the club.

The players mentioned as having been torn from their clubs and laying waste to Scottish and Lancashire football were willingly sold by their clubs for an acceptable fee. I know there were "incentives" offered to prise the players away, but to say we bought a championships is ludicrous, the fans support allowed us to bring in better players, to a team which was littered with home grown players, Labone, Wright etc. Look at how the likes of Chelsea are doing business now, totally founded on unearned income.

Larry
There’s a lot of truth in what you say. It should be pointed out that, yes the teams with the most money bought the best players just like today but its how you come by that money. In the sixties we generated our money by the number of scousers that went through the gate and therefore it could be argued that the supporters from this city were the people responsible for its success. Thats the difference with today, unless you have some billionaire who wants to use the club as a play thing or you’ve had a prolonged period of success and the glory hunters have latched onto you or as in the case of Man Utd everybody felt sorry for you (the Munich air disaster), which generated there prolonged success, you’ve got no chance. As for Sky, they put the Bolton’s, Middlesborough’s and the like on a level playing field with us! Incidentally, if it was’nt for Sky you would only be paying half as much in real terms to get into Goodison Park.

Larry
My recollection of the 1962-63 first choice team is
WEST
PARKER LABONE WILSON
VERNON STEVENS
SCOTT YOUNG MORRISEY

What a team of superstars but hardly littered with home-grown talent. In fact only Labby was not purchased.

Of course John Moores put up the money for these transfers, albeit by way of interest-free loans, but that is just the way the Russian works at Chelsea. The huge gates followed the expenditure rather than funding the transfer costs.

Let me make it clear that I was all for it. Moores had the wisdom and good business sense to see that the ending of the maximum wage would change football forever. He invested to take advantage of the prevailing conditions and made Everton hugely successful.

My point is that it is hypocritical to moan that as the prevailing conditions do not happen to suit us now the rules should be changed. We were happy to use our financial power in the past and should accept that others are using theirs now. In my view this is a temporary albeit prolonged situation. Sooner or later, some team with the right manager with the right backing will break the big four's stranglehold and who can say what will happen to Chelsea when the Russian withdraws his support, as he will, or to Arsenal and Man U when Wenger and Ferguson go?

The easiest way to solve the problem of rich clubs dominating leagues (it happens across Europe with Real Madrid etc.) is to introduce a transfer embargo on any club carrying over say £50 million debt. At least if a club dominates its respective league you know its because they are well managed on and off the field and thus deserve to be where they are.

I hate to say this but although I think many of the suggestions raised here are good ones, the answer to ’breaking’ the top 4 may lie with the Man City’s and Newcastles of this world.

Maybe I’m oversimplifying this - but then again, maybe it’s just very simple, but it would appear to me that the fact we have a ’Top 4’ and also four Champions League places is more than a coincidence. If Man City throw millions at players - and maybe Newcastle’s new owners will be able to do the same - then there’s a real possibility there’ll be six clubs vying for four places.

I would hope that that would break the cartel and give the other clubs a chance to catch up. I think Manchester United and Chelsea are still streets ahead of Arsenal and Liverpool and it’ll be a while before their ’top 2’ status is broken but the Premier League needs to be more competitive. If that means that money is distributed more evenly - then great. If it means that exact opposite .... which is that there needs to be more rich clubs, then great.

I think the abolition of the maximum wage had a lot to do with the early 60’s buying spree. Prior to that Tony Kay or Brian Douglas etc. had no real incentive to move from their boyhood club.

I seem to remember Sir JM didn’t put money in for free, they were interest free loans that had to be repaid but there was no massive saving when the mortgage rate was a more often than not a fixed deal at 4%....To quote C. J. I didn’t get were I am today by throwing my money away

EJ,

As I expected - no answer and a tinge of condescension.

As for the rest of the complaints where i’ve provided a reasoned polemic...as woman scorned...and all that (considering some of the mindless cliches thrown around yesterday).

P.S Yes, I am 12 years old.

Couldn’t agree more. Creating a more level playing field is also merely a matter of political will. Fifa need to take control of football before it eats itself. When people see beyond the garlic, gitanes and questionable personal hygiene of the French they get to hear from Platini a great amount of commonsense.

The only way to fix it is, in my view, absent a billionaire benefactor (and Platini et al are working frantically to close that door):

1. All gate receipts must be shared. If Man Utd don’t like sharing half their gate money with Bolton, then Bolton don’t have to turn up to provide them with an easy 3 points and a huge ball of cash.

2. Success must no longer be as lavishly financially rewarded as it is now. Winning the European Cup is, of itself, a boon to any club’s coffers from shirts sales, bandwagon-jumping, etc. Dumping a huge pile of cash on them for it as well is overkill.

3. If you win the title, you must not be allowed to sign any new players the following season. If you finish 2nd, you can sign one, and so on. That would really level the playing field in short order.

4. Bring technology into the game. For too long, the elite clubs have enjoyed preferential refereeing. Think of all the soft penalties Man Utd get in a season. Now think of how many stonewall ones we didn’t get last season.

We had a chance to break into the top 4 by spending well over the summer and completely royally cocked it up. The board have no-one but themselves to blame for that (and Moyes with splashing out £17M on another Pear Coughdrop/Beattie).