The Mail Bag
The future's bright
Comments (25)
So the January transfer window politely dribbles to a close... Judging by the way that even Sky Sports News presenters, over-excitable bunch that they can be, can't hide the boredom in their voices over the loan merry-go-round that is more akin to kids swapping Panini stickers in the playground than the desperation-fuelled cash splashing of windows gone by...
Are we really seeing a return to reality in the transfer market? If so, this can only be a good thing for Everton under David Moyes. But should this give us optimism for the medium term future of the club?
I'd like to think so, and can see the sense of some of the arguments in the article below which, in a rose-tinted (or should that be royal blue tinted?) bit of crystal ball gazing puts in the 'Big 4', 2020 version...
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/336623-2020-vision-who-will-be-the-premier-league-big-four-in-ten-years#page/4
Visionary or madness? It's the finest of lines...
Ben Patchesa, Posted 01/02/2010 at 17:53:33
Comments
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
He’ll be a candidate when Fergie leaves — fact.
The media will salivate over who will get the job but I strongly suspect it will be a European candidate with the pedigree of silverware at the highest level, Moyes hasn’t even won a domestic trophy.
And this will mean that the 3 of the current big four and Man City will not have the best players?
And will somehow not be able to afford the best and most creative accountants and lawyers to circumvent such a rule?
Poor attempt at soothsaying.
If Platini’s clear vendetta against the Premier League had any legs, his plans would already be in place.
What would be interesting is to know what the collective debt of the Premier League was in 2000, because it is now estimated to be in the regions of £3 billion, and more alarmingly, I read a report recently that stated most Prem clubs reported an increase in turnover coupled with an increase in indebtedness, and if an increase in revenue isn’t bringing the debt down, what will it be in 2020? £6 billion? £10billion? Seriously you don’t need to be an economic genius to realise that sometime in the probably not too distant future the party's going to end.
How is it an economic basket case?
Football has been this way for a long time.
I may not like what it is... and neither may you... but suggesting that some kind of level playing field can be introduced via the magic wand of home grown players or 6+5 is absurd.
In fact, the home-grown rule will be counter-productive — it will simply mean that the big clubs will hoover up the talent at an obscene age so they can be considered home-grown.
As much as it kills me to say it, the Premier League is a fantastic league on the basis of rampant capitalism; if stupid men want to spend stupid money, then who am I to argue?
If you want the Lithuanian league to be on the same level as the English league, then you’re probably right to support Platini — if that’s the ’democratising’ of football, then count me out.
David is certainly right when he states that the EPL is an economic basket case. No business in the real world would survive using, say Man U’s economic model, without bail outs by governments. Oh, hang, on that’s already happened ain’t it?? Can’t see Cameron bailing out the shite tho!
Platini may have it ’in for’ the Premier League but, as far as I am concerned, anything that helps to remove the financial bias from the game would help; the self-perpetuating circle of European Football = Money = players = Success = European Football has only served to reduce the game to a financial battle, which is not what I want football to be about.
The result of this is that unless a Club falls over the thick wallet of a stupid man (Man City?) then all the trophies are highly likely to be perpetually shared out amongst the same small number of Clubs, season after season. As is the case.
This is what is slowly strangling the game to death... largely unnoticed unless you look for the evidence. My neighbour (in my seat in the Upper Bullens) has grown to detest football! He no longer watches it habitually on the TV and attends Everton games only because he is emotionally attached!
Everything that we used to dislike and ridicule about football in Scotland, Italy and Spain (ie:- the same clubs contesting everything year after year) is now the case very largely in the Premier League.
As for the Premier League being a fantastic league... well is it? It certainly isn’t in respect to the generality of the football served up. (For every Manure v Arse game there are 10 Sunderland v Stoke (or the like) disasters served up every week!) The fact that, on top of this, we can be fairly sure where the trophies will be going every season leaves the Premier League far from fantastic.
It is without a doubt a league that is dominated by the teams with the most money but, as we’ve seen, that can change — adding new teams to that mix..and to be honest it’s been like that for a very long time — people who suggests it was brill in the good old days have selective memories... We profited from being the Mersey Millionaires.
I’d also suggest that the less glamorous teams also benefit from the attraction created by the big teams — both in terms of getting players who do not want to leave the league and profitting from big money sales to big clubs. This wouldn’t happen in a level playing field. Neither would the big pay out from Sky. This trickle down effect allows the likes of Fulham, Wigan and ourselves to aspire to be better... It raises the bar.
I’d simply rather have a league with the best players in the best teams — and if money facilitates that, then so be it...
I’m also of the opinion that the introduction of badly thought out rules will not make a blind bit of difference, as the rich clubs will either veto them (assuming the EU allows the rules) — or find novel ways to undermine them...
And even if they were introduced and clubs actually abided by them — the result would effectively be a lower standard of player and team in the Premier League...
But, in all honesty — a level playing field is a mythical ideal.
So, I simply can’t agree that the league is poor because it’s dominated. All leagues are dominated.
The game as a whole was indeed more exciting and unpredictable then and I have no hesitation in saying so. I do not have a selective memory I have an accurate one.
Neither can I agree that something can be both reasonable and innacurate at the same time.
Or... that none of those teams were among the most affluent teams during the period you’ve suggested.
I'm sick of this transfer window — its whole existence is a shambles - there is no other market type in the whole world where you can only buy and sell in the Summer or January — it solves nothing and creates periods of inflated prices (Summer) and periods of next to nothing (January — who the hell are going to sell their best players in January — unless you are maybe a Portsmouth situation). End it now, FA, Uefa and whoever else makes these decisions...
Although he was considered a benefactor he was also a hard nosed businessman and EFC always ran at a profit then and did not run at crazy levels of indebtedness...
The current "Rich" clubs are only so because of obscene borrowings, ridiculous player’s wages and the amount of money given up by Sky and the Champions League to facilitate this.
The only enjoyment for the non-big 4 clubs these days is to either draw or beat them in one game not to dream about winning the league or the European Cup or Cup winners cup as they were known then.
I have to say Football is a dark place right now... lacking morals and principles and being run by morons.
Wage bills would have to be trimmed and the money saved used to clear the debt and invest in the infrastructure of the club and junior development. Young kids trying to play for their local clubs would have a chance, the foreign player influx short-termism abandoned.
The game would be reborn as it was in the sixties with several teams competing for the top prizes, the G14 monopoly laid waste.
There’s no doubt that football is relatively far more money oriented that it was then... but let's not day-dream about the good old days of a league that was high on morals and principles — and devoid of any morons!
It’s simply revisionism — and so is the myth that the league was far better when players smoked ten fags at half time and kicked the crap out of each other.
I hate the rampant prurience of footballing culture as much as the next man — but it’s unlikely to change any time soon... and in my opinion we are least getting some good football from it.
Until I see a workable alternative that isn’t based on lowest common denominator football, then I’m afraid this is as good as it gets.
If your system is honesty based on clubs living within their means - then it would have to bear some relevance to their ability to pay the debt...
The top teams would be sitting pretty on their merchandising and other revenue streams..
We’d be fucked.
P.S If the local lads were good enough, tehy’d be getting chances at premiership clubs all around teh country - what you’re talking about is diluting the standard of the players available...Not something I agree with.
I want us to have the best players we can...Not the best local players we can.
I’m no doubt in a small minority here..but hey, that’s opinion.
The development of players in this country is fucked because of the influx of foreign players, coaches and owners -look at the England and Scottish international teams, also rans, we should have Rooneys, Balls, Denis Laws, Alex Youngs, Jim Baxters etc queueing up to get into the side... we don't even have a goalkeeper!!
The England coach is Italian, the country that taught the world to play the game over ran by dickheads like Benitez who think success is about spending more and more money on players with higher and higher wage bills.
Lunacy.
ps: Alan Ball was told he was not good enough.
It was reasonable to assume that Everton had lots of money available because of this fact but it was inaccurate to consider that the club itself was rich. It is different today in that some clubs are massively in debt, others are in debt massively to their owners. This was never the case with Everton.
As for an average standard of player.... well you amuse me.... great players were spread all over the First Division at that time, Johnny Haynes played for Fulham, Billy Wright for Wolves — these are just examples. That would just not be possible today.
As for the wealth of the Clubs I mention, Everton had Moores and Man Utd had Edwards, both of whom provided similar financial benefits to their clubs and both without massive debt being loaded onto the clubs. The other clubs were no better off financially than any other. They achieved what they did because the mechanics of the game allowed that sort of thing to occur then... it does not now and that is the difference.
The game may have improved technically, as you would expect it to over time, and it may be safer for the spectator, but give me Everton v anybody circa 1966 to 73 any day over the shite regularly served up now.
I’m sorry, but you’re confusing me with someone who cares about the quality of the England squad. I don’t... and even if I did, I think it’s a facile argument to suggest that England’s footballing pedigree would be improved by flooding the training grounds with English kids. Yeah, they’d get more training... but they’d be playing against lower quality opposition - and would that really increase their talent?
Dave,
Again, your opinion...
Talent always exists but doesn’t always get a chance to express itself these days because we (me included) are all too impatient for immediate success. Unfortunately, until someone deports the Murdochs of this world to another planet it will likely remain that way. On the other hand, what comes round goes round....
That’s right. But it’s not because of the influx of foreign players and coaches. It’s because the talent just isn’t there in England/Scotland any more, at least not in the same numbers. English/Scottish kids are too busy playing Playstation or going out and getting ASBOs to care about football.
Do you really think clubs scour Africa and Latin America without doing the same here? Scouts go where the talent is. Clubs can develop players but they can’t give them talent they don’t have.
As far as foreign coaches are concerned, it’s good that they’re here. Because they’re teaching our players and kids how to play the game properly. Call Benitez all the names under the sun but can you name a better English manager than him?
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to the MailBag, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
1 Posted 02/02/2010 at 02:29:38
Report abuse
-
Tesco shouldering most of the costs for the new stadium? Untrue.
We are not similar to Arsenal. Arsenal don’t have to worry about keeping Wenger. He’ll go on there till he retires or "moves upstairs".
And I really don’t get this obsession with Moyes being a replacement for Fergie at Utd. The reputation Everton has amongst neutrals for the style of football we play (whether just or not) would scupper that notion with Utd’s fans.