LesterRam Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Chelsea paid £150.8m by Premier League after winning 2016-17 title Chelsea were paid £150.8m by the Premier League after winning the 2016-17 title - 50% more than the top earners in 2015-16. The 2016-17 season was the first of the latest TV deal and saw a total of almost £2.4bn paid to the 20 clubs - up from £1.6bn last season. Bottom club Sunderland got £93.471m - more than the £93.219m 2015-16 winners Leicester pocketed the previous season. The figures are based on broadcast and commercial deals plus prize money. Funds from the Premier League's central commercial deals and overseas broadcast rights are shared equally - as is half of the domestic broadcast income. A quarter is paid out in prize money based on each club's league position and the other quarter in "facility fees" for each game broadcast on UK television. Arsenal were the top earners in 2015-16 with £100.9m - but only the three relegated sides of Hull, Middlesbrough and Sunderland were paid less than that figure in 2016-17. The ratio between the highest and lowest totals paid by the Premier League to its clubs in 2016-17 was 1.61 to 1, the lowest among Europe's top leagues, which means the Premier League is more equal when it comes to sharing revenue than its rivals. The Premier League also paid out nearly £220m to Aston Villa, Cardiff, Fulham, Newcastle, Norwich, QPR, Reading and Wigan in parachute payments. Villa, Newcastle and Norwich - the three most recently relegated sides - got almost £41m each. Premier League payment to clubs 2016-17 Club (UK live TV appearances in brackets)Prize money (£s)Total payment (£s) Prize money determined by finishing position - data from Premier League website Chelsea (28)38,832,180. 150,811,183 Spurs (25)36,890,571. 145,461,325 Man City (28)34,948,962. 146,927,965 Liverpool (29)33,007,353. 146,112,439 Arsenal (25)31,065,744. 139,636,498 Man Utd (28)29,124,135. 141,103,138 Everton (18)27,182,526. 127,800,699 Southampton (15)25,240,917. 122,450,841 Bournemouth (13)23,299,308. 118,237,066 West Brom (11)21,357,699. 114,023,291 West Ham (15)19,416,090. 116,626,014 Leicester (16)17,474,481. 115,820,488 Stoke (10)15,532,872. 107,062,381 Crystal Palace (14)13,591,263. 109,665,104 Swansea (10)11,649,654. 103,197,163 Burnley (10)9,708,045. 101,237,554 Watford (13)7,766,436. 102,704,194 Hull (10)5,824,827. 97,354,336 Boro (13)3,883,218. 98,820,976 Sunderland (10)1,941,609. 93,471,118 Total407,737,8902,3. 98,515,773 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEL Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 There you go mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Tibbs Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Absolutely obscene. Almost 100 mill for finishing bottom. Madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 £100 million for playing awful football. Do they ever release viewing figures? I'm sure Leeds v Newcastle last season pulled in more viewers than some of these Prem games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal is a Ram Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnigmaRam Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 All it does is drive up costs to have sky. It's about this money filtered down to UK grassroots instead of going to high profile signings abroad like Pogba etc. its a disgrace but that's just my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derbados Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 I don't understand how clubs like Sunderland are so ridiculously terrible with that amount of money coming in?? With that level of investment in each club the premier league should have the strongest teams in world football. The reality is apart from 3-4 teams the league is shocking compared to others on far less earnings per season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfie Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 hour ago, Derbados said: I don't understand how clubs like Sunderland are so ridiculously terrible with that amount of money coming in?? With that level of investment in each club the premier league should have the strongest teams in world football. The reality is apart from 3-4 teams the league is shocking compared to others on far less earnings per season This is the first year of the new deal. if you read the original post, last year's payments were a lot less (though still massive). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 The league is so rich because of diversity in nationalities. Something like 75% of the players regularly playing PL football are foreign, meaning so many abroad subscribe and follow PL football just because of a few key players. And teams know this, hence them buying such players. Nobody can convince me United bought Chicharito and Ji-Sun Park because they were top class players. They bought them to appeal to the Mexican and South Korean markets. The Bundesliga and La Liga are both made up of over 50% of German and Spanish players. It's no coincidence that their national teams benefit from a larger pool of players integrated within the top tiers rather than in England where we have so few. Not only that, the PL is the most diverse in terma of style too. In the Bundesliga or La Liga you don't get Sam Allardye teams. You don't get Tony Pulis teams. All the teams playing to a particular style also helps the national team have an identity, whereas England will never have one when Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool and United have such contrasting styles and systems. The PL's existence means England will never have a winning national team. But the PL makes too much money for anybody to even care anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 Needs radical options to get a fairer distribution of football monies for the good of football from the money factory of premiership clubs. from our championship view it would be interesting for the league to refuse to transfer any players to premiership clubs or championship clubs not being allowed or wanting any premiership players either signed permanently or on loan to hopfully get a fairer share of of the playing talent from a younger age. the reality is that people need to refuse to buy the sky and BT packages and force them to change the way things are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenBr Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 @Animal is a Ram Serie A, BL, and Ligue 1 are all joke leagues though, which is why they aren't as entertaining to watch and hence don't have as much money coming in. On 6/2/2017 at 12:56, Derbados said: I don't understand how clubs like Sunderland are so ridiculously terrible with that amount of money coming in?? With that level of investment in each club the premier league should have the strongest teams in world football. The reality is apart from 3-4 teams the league is shocking compared to others on far less earnings per season I just had a quick look at the La Liga prize money and if I am looking at correct figures it doesn't seem all that different to the PL. Other than that though I agree that I don't really understand how our teams can have such large incomes and yet still for the most part still be so uncompetitive in the Champions League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 Could some of the money be split between clubs differently? Maybe rewarding clubs which play English players under the age of 21 or 23 be worthwhile - the money being distributed at the end of the season proportional to the minutes of qualifying players. Imagine if you could only get half of the prize money by playing a few young players in every game. I'm more than certain it would result in a huge increase in youth featuring, and which would be beneficial to the England youth sides both in the short and long term, as well as helping the seniors in the long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal is a Ram Posted June 13, 2017 Share Posted June 13, 2017 On 6/11/2017 at 14:58, Ghost of Clough said: Maybe rewarding clubs which play English players under the age of 21 or 23 be worthwhile - the money being distributed at the end of the season proportional to the minutes of qualifying players. The EFL do something similar to what you're suggesting. Obviously not to the same monetary scale, but still. https://www.efl.com/news/2017/june/efl-futures-provides-end-of-season-cash-boost-for-clubs/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted June 13, 2017 Share Posted June 13, 2017 24 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said: The EFL do something similar to what you're suggesting. Obviously not to the same monetary scale, but still. https://www.efl.com/news/2017/june/efl-futures-provides-end-of-season-cash-boost-for-clubs/ It's a start. Unfortunately that deal is only worth about £10k on average per club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted June 13, 2017 Share Posted June 13, 2017 2 hours ago, Animal is a Ram said: The EFL do something similar to what you're suggesting. Obviously not to the same monetary scale, but still. https://www.efl.com/news/2017/june/efl-futures-provides-end-of-season-cash-boost-for-clubs/ They do until the likes of Luton play youngsters in one of the cups and then they fine them for it. No consistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.