League 1 | 22/23 Season

[GenBr]

17 hours ago, Ambitious said:

You can't give a team in League Two the same amount as Man Utd when they're the ones drawing the audience. 

If it upsets Man Utd they can go and form the super league. If tv money goes down as a result then so be it.

Teams like man utd or even Derby should not be getting such ludicrous amounts of money just because they have more fans. It just entrenches them at the top of the game and destroys competition.

Collective negotiation and equal share is the only acceptable option for me.

[Ghost of Clough]

21 hours ago, GenBr said:

Yes no more damage than the current system and no more damage than your proposed system.

The equal share that the Premier League teams get for the tv rights is currently £79 million each plus whatever they earn in prize money. In your system the gap between the top two leagues is still ludicrous and you've done nothing to fix the problem. Can you not see how much damage that is doing to the football pyramid?

If you divide the equal share between all of the clubs equally then every club receives just under £20 million each and as above I vehemently disagree that this would do anymore damage to the pyramid than either your system or the current system. It would make the Premier League and EFL actually competitive again and keeps clubs further down the pyramid alive. However I would fully support spreading the revenue to the lower reaches of the football pyramid if that is what you desire. There would of course have to be a cut off at some point, but providing more money across the pyramid would not bother me in the slightest.

By far the biggest problem is the uneven level of competition in the Championship. A team like Hull in the 1st or 2nd year of parachute payments would have a budget 4 times that of a bottom 6 side (where they'd be without parachute payments, or Boro having almost double the budget of the team with the highest non-parachute revenue whereas they'd be mid-table without.
Everyone, except those in receipt of parachute payments agreed this is a problem.

This will absolutely make the Football League a closed shop. It's bad enough in the Championship as things stand, with parachute clubs having 2-5 times more revenue that the smallest clubs, but your proposal creates a gap at least 1000% between the bottom side in L2 and top in NL. To be quite honest, it would be the worst decision ever in English football.

What I suggested levels things out considerably. Distributing parachute payments through all three leagues removes the single biggest problem in the Championship. It also cuts the financial gap between the Championship and L1 down by an average of £4.5m. Total to each league being:
Championship: £672m (down from £800m)
L1: £384m (up from £312m)
L2: £108m (up from £84m)
[with £32m to spare]
The gap between the Championship and the PL for most clubs is reduced by £5m (with a more even playing field for all in the division)
The gap between L1 and the Championship is reduced by £200m.

[Bris Vegas]

Wednesday 3-3 Pompey

Ipswich 1-1 Bolton

Plymouth 1-0 Barnsley

Wycombe 3-0 Burton

Cheltenham 2-3 Posh

I think I’ve covered the likely top six candidates there, which includes Oxford. 

[Ghost of Clough]

34 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said:

Wednesday 3-3 Pompey

Ipswich 1-1 Bolton

Plymouth 1-0 Barnsley

Wycombe 3-0 Burton

Cheltenham 2-3 Posh

I think I’ve covered the likely top six candidates there, which includes Oxford. 

MK Dons. Lost away to Cambridge 1-0

[Topram]

Think Peterborough will do very well with Marriott and Clarke Harris up top, they’ll score shed loads again was hoping someone would sign Clarke Harris 

[Day]

Don't blame him.

 

[Sparkle]

Would somebody ask them if they will release John Brayford and we can sign him to play right back please?

[walkleyowl]

Seeing as I don't have the permission to post in the main forum I'll add it here

Derby remaining away ticket allocations guide

Cambridge 1470, down 1k from last season but not got a clue why

Accy up to 2.6k

Ipswich now 2k cos of lower stand safety 

MK 6.5k max down 300 and police advice

Pompey 2.8k

Burton 1.7kish

Bolton 5.1k 

Vale, Bolton had 3,250 and our allocation is announced soon BUT they maybe moving away fans to opposite end after proving popular in their PO semi so could be 2.2k

Cheltenham 1.5kish

Plymouth 1.6k 

Wycombe 1.8k

Barnsley 5k max 

Oxford 1.8k unless Plod reduce it like they did to us and was around 300 fewer

FGR 1.2k

Posh 4k 

Brizzle R 1.1k

Exeter sub 1k

Wednesday 3k upper 1k lower but will depend on what may be at stake which could reduce it

 

 

[Sparkle]

Didn’t Barnsley give us 9,000 a few years back one xmas where we won 2-1 or 2-0 - it was my birthday so it’s a bit blurry 

[Boycie]

So Wednesday could reduce the away allocation if there’s a winner takes all game on?

Thats ridiculous?  We don’t reduce our away end for anything, Forest get full allocation.

How many tickets do the Blades get when they rock up?

If it wasn’t for covid, Wednesday would have had full allocation for the relegation match two seasons ago.

Just realised, it’s South Yorkshire Police isn’t it? They’ll reduce allocation and increase the issue of batons, dogs and horses to officers.

Edited September 9, 2022 by Boycie

[Shake n Bake]

7 hours ago, Sparkle said:

Didn’t Barnsley give us 9,000 a few years back one xmas where we won 2-1 or 2-0 - it was my birthday so it’s a bit blurry 

Wasn't it the march of the promotion season? Seth Johnson clobbered a fan on the head with a rogue volley in the pre march warm up if I remember correctly! I think we won 2-1 with Oakley scoring (maybe the winner?)

[Will the Ram]

On 09/09/2022 at 14:48, Sparkle said:

Didn’t Barnsley give us 9,000 a few years back one xmas where we won 2-1 or 2-0 - it was my birthday so it’s a bit blurry 

We took 6,000 that day. 

[1of4]

Regarding the difference in the finances between the top and lower league clubs, there was an interesting article in the paper today.

The Bradford City CEO, talked about the impact the energy cost could have on lower teams. To help keep down their electricity bills, he said that clubs may have to move the kick-off times, to reduce the amount of time they would need to use their floodlights.

His he just crying wolf or could we soon be regularly attending matches with a 12.00 or earlier kick-off?

If the cost of electricity raises as predicted, could some clubs lose money when playing midweek games?

[Van der MoodHoover]

On 11/09/2022 at 22:32, 1of4 said:

Regarding the difference in the finances between the top and lower league clubs, there was an interesting article in the paper today.

The Bradford City CEO, talked about the impact the energy cost could have on lower teams. To help keep down their electricity bills, he said that clubs may have to move the kick-off times, to reduce the amount of time they would need to use their floodlights.

His he just crying wolf or could we soon be regularly attending matches with a 12.00 or earlier kick-off?

If the cost of electricity raises as predicted, could some clubs lose money when playing midweek games?

I think a lot of games had kick offs moved to midday in the 1970s when there was electricity shortages - the infamous "3 day week". 

 

[GB SPORTS]

9 hours ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

I think a lot of games had kick offs moved to midday in the 1970s when there was electricity shortages - the infamous "3 day week". 

 

That was due more to pre determined power outages than cost though, but I think it maybe on the horizon again and quite rightly so. 

[walkleyowl]

On 09/09/2022 at 15:15, Boycie said:

So Wednesday could reduce the away allocation if there’s a winner takes all game on?

Thats ridiculous?  We don’t reduce our away end for anything, Forest get full allocation.

How many tickets do the Blades get when they rock up?

If it wasn’t for covid, Wednesday would have had full allocation for the relegation match two seasons ago.

Just realised, it’s South Yorkshire Police isn’t it? They’ll reduce allocation and increase the issue of batons, dogs and horses to officers.

We can offer what we want, we are meeting League guidelines, much like you lot reducing our allocation from 6k to 3k due to demand from your own fans. 3k is ample.

[Ghost of Clough]

1 minute ago, walkleyowl said:

We can offer what we want, we are meeting League guidelines, much like you lot reducing our allocation from 6k to 3k due to demand from your own fans. 3k is ample.

The maximum away allocation is fixed due to segregation and internal stadium layout. It cannot be reduced because of demand from home fans. The away corner has a capacity of about 3150, and is only increased to about 5000 for FA Cup fixtures if the away side requests that amount.

[walkleyowl]

1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said:

The maximum away allocation is fixed due to segregation and internal stadium layout. It cannot be reduced because of demand from home fans. The away corner has a capacity of about 3150, and is only increased to about 5000 for FA Cup fixtures if the away side requests that amount.

Yeah more the point you moved fans into the South Stand and gave away fans the corner instead due to demand which is fine, 3k is better you get at most places.

[Sparkle]

Going back a bit didn’t we reduce the away allocation for one game at the BBG to a very mean 400 vs Swindon for some reason 

[Boycie]

1 hour ago, walkleyowl said:

We can offer what we want, we are meeting League guidelines, much like you lot reducing our allocation from 6k to 3k due to demand from your own fans. 3k is ample.

If you mean when we moved the away fans from behind the goal to the position in the corner then that was 2013?  I’m not even sure it was 6k?  
What I was talking about was  constantly limiting numbers during a season depending on who you play?

We used to get 5k at Forest but only 2k now.  I thought we ought to have limited away fans to the minimum 2k but due to segregation issues we’d have just had empty seats that generate no income.