UEFA Champions League 2019/20

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports



TV income is the driver but TV income is driven by viewers and supporters ... so to claim that Countries and their teams with the most supporters are not earning their position? That's just the usual politics of envy that pervades society today.

The biggest countries with the most fans have the best clubs? Why should 1.9m paying Scottish fans have the same expectation as 13.9m paying English fans? ... it's not big bad UEFA it's economics. UEFA massively over reward the smaller leagues, if it was done on pure numbers the small clubs would get vastly less than they do now.

attendance-european-football-leagues-map.png


Nothing to stop a team from a smaller league making the grade, but to say they are 'entitled' is to have no understanding of the real world.
 
I feel like we are going to draw either Barca or Juve, and those are the two I want to miss - if we are going to play a powerhouse I would like it to be one we haven't come up against recently
 
Let's be absolutely clear here. TV income rules European football, period. TV money, sponsorship income, and matchday income are the three pillars of revenue for these clubs, and sponsorship income is heavily, heavily correlated with TV money.

The kinds of clubs we're talking about here, the Benficas, the Basel's, the Ajax's are some of the very best run clubs in the world who excel at talent development and always wisely reinvest their funds from sales. But there is no way for a domestic league in a country of 10 million people to generate the same kind of revenue as La Liga or the PL in much larger countries in languages and cultures that are globally familiar, adding even more available market to sell. Those clubs in smaller countries are in the financial position the market has dictated for them.

UEFA, through its wildly popular continental competitions COULD act as a countervailing force, structuring the competitions to make them difficult to be dominated by a handful of clubs and countries and disbursing its enormous revenues with an eye toward supporting the game everywhere.

They do the exact opposite, centralizing all the focus into the CL, ensuring safe passage to all the big brands into those big dollar games, and even having the gall to structure their prize money with a large chunk of it being dictated by the local TV market of the competitors. They emphasize and reinforce the disparity.

Corruption, greed, cowardice, there are many reasons they do it, but it's a terrible detriment to the game. The global audience is fed a steady and ever increasing dose of their glittering Juve vs. Barca type matchups and that revenue just feeds back into creating more of the same, while the heart and soul of the sport, the local interest, the match-going supporters, the community bonds, wither on the vine. It's a mistake.

So the UK's record attendances are a sign of the heart and soul of the sport, the local interest, the match-going supporters, the community bonds, withering on the vine.

Can you explain that obvious dichotomy?

UK football average attendance growing in every division:

grattnengavg.gif
 
So the UK's record attendances are a sign of the heart and soul of the sport, the local interest, the match-going supporters, the community bonds, withering on the vine.

Can you explain that obvious dichotomy?

The UK distributes its revenue more equitably than other countries for exactly this reason!

There are so many different interests involved between teams in a league, between leagues in a pyramid, between national federations in continental associations and between the continental associations themselves. It's a complex web.

What's clear is that the structure in the UEFA competitions pushes yet more money toward the small handful of teams in the small handful of leagues that are already dominating the sport financially.
 
The UK distributes its revenue more equitably than other countries for exactly this reason!

There are so many different interests involved between teams in a league, between leagues in a pyramid, between national federations in continental associations and between the continental associations themselves. It's a complex web.

What's clear is that the structure in the UEFA competitions pushes yet more money toward the small handful of teams in the small handful of leagues that are already dominating the sport financially.

I accept your point but think on this ....

UEFA were to push 70/80/100m to Ajax, Celtic, Brugge, Zagreb, Slavia Prague etc. In each of those countries the domestic league is now screwed with one club having five times the resources of all the other clubs. It happens already with teams just receiving qualifying payments.

If UEFA were to become the "financial supply line" for a top team in the lesser countries that would damage domestic football, the reality is it already has in many places. By pushing the majority of the money to the top leagues at least UEFA are not destroying the heart and soul of the sport, the local interest, the match-going supporters, and the community bonds elsewhere.

Sure the big 16 clubs will have an advantage but it's not like the EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, Serie A and Ligue 1 are all one team walkovers, they do at least have some level of competitiveness.

Whilst I take your point that "fair" distribution to all those taking part is the eutopian dream, in reality giving massive sums of money to just one club in a lesser league risks destroying that league.

There is an argument the UEFA should give the cash to the participating clubs parent league to distribute amongst it's members, but again a good theory that's totally unworkable in practice - Liverpool win the CL and 20 EPL clubs get an equal share of the rewards? In a business environment that's simply never going to happen.

Of course we could nationalise all 92 professional clubs, give then each an equal share of revenue, and pay all the players an equal salary regardless of ability. Socialist football, didn't Woolwich try that?
 
There is an argument the UEFA should give the cash to the participating clubs parent league to distribute amongst it's members, but again a good theory that's totally unworkable in practice - Liverpool win the CL and 20 EPL clubs get an equal share of the rewards? In a business environment that's simply never going to happen.

Says who? That's exactly what they ought to do.

If the local FA's want to distribute all the money to the club that earned it, so be it, but in most cases they wouldn't.

And this leaves aside the question of how to structure and divvy the money up between competitions. UEFA could go back to one club per nation playing for the European Cup tomorrow. Bring back the Cup Winner's Cup to add value to the national competitions that are open to everyone, and then let the Europa League be the sprawling competition full of teams from all over the place. And divide the money in thirds, equal to each competition.

The votes of UEFA members would be there to make this happen if the political will of the leadership were there to understand it as their interest and their mandate.
 
I accept your point but think on this ....

UEFA were to push 70/80/100m to Ajax, Celtic, Brugge, Zagreb, Slavia Prague etc. In each of those countries the domestic league is now screwed with one club having five times the resources of all the other clubs. It happens already with teams just receiving qualifying payments.

If UEFA were to become the "financial supply line" for a top team in the lesser countries that would damage domestic football, the reality is it already has in many places. By pushing the majority of the money to the top leagues at least UEFA are not destroying the heart and soul of the sport, the local interest, the match-going supporters, and the community bonds elsewhere.

Sure the big 16 clubs will have an advantage but it's not like the EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, Serie A and Ligue 1 are all one team walkovers, they do at least have some level of competitiveness.

Whilst I take your point that "fair" distribution to all those taking part is the eutopian dream, in reality giving massive sums of money to just one club in a lesser league risks destroying that league.

There is an argument the UEFA should give the cash to the participating clubs parent league to distribute amongst it's members, but again a good theory that's totally unworkable in practice - Liverpool win the CL and 20 EPL clubs get an equal share of the rewards? In a business environment that's simply never going to happen.

Of course we could nationalise all 92 professional clubs and pay all the players an equal salary regardless of ability. Socialist football, didn't Woolwich try that?

Agree entirely. The best way is for leagues and clubs in those leagues to build themselves up fo, the ground. Sharing wealth equally, much like we saw when the TV money got pretty evenly split up doesn't lead to skill being the victor, it leads to quick fixes thus leading to more poor decision making, more chaos and as you said, a sense of injustice for those that bring the majority of the punters to the screens.

There'll be more viewers tuning in to watch Man U globally than there are Bournemouth so really, why should Bournemouth get an equal share? The only true way Bournemouth can and should muscle in, using Emma's an example is through graft, hard work, determination and organically growing their status in the game and the same goes for every European and worldwide league. It's the only sustainable and fair way even if it looks brutally harsh on the surface. I'd love to see 16 knockout teams from 16 different countries but until those leagues find a way of doing what the German league, French league, Italian league etc did, which ultimately is or was to grow a sport that was passion in those countries it will forever lag and rightly so. A team like Ajax can make a Europa League final and a Champions League semi final, it is possible without handouts so let these clubs do so with more satisfaction when they crack it.

Truth be told we get more money in this country because it's a greater spectacle. Greater pressures with stardom, less of a private life, more of a weekend culture that surrounds it so for me we rightly get paid more. The amount of Danes, Swedes that choose our league over their own domestic leagues is where the rot sets in in those leagues, that ain't our fault that's down to those countries to find solutions to.
 
Says who? That's exactly what they ought to do.

If the local FA's want to distribute all the money to the club that earned it, so be it, but in most cases they wouldn't.

And this leaves aside the question of how to structure and divvy the money up between competitions. UEFA could go back to one club per nation playing for the European Cup tomorrow. Bring back the Cup Winner's Cup to add value to the national competitions that are open to everyone, and then let the Europa League be the sprawling competition full of teams from all over the place. And divide the money in thirds, equal to each competition.

The votes of UEFA members would be there to make this happen if the political will of the leadership were there to understand it as their interest and their mandate.

Here's one for you. Do you think there are more Danes and Swedes that support English clubs or more English supports Danish and/ or Swedish clubs? The sooner locals no longer get swayed by the bright lights of the bigger clubs in foreign leagues, the greater the chance they will have a league that is strong enough to go toe to toe with them and the less money the TV funds in the bigger leagues will generate. Self sufficiency is key, not waiting on or hoping for handouts and I'd love to see it happening but it starts at home.
 
Self sufficiency is key, not waiting on or hoping for handouts and I'd love to see it happening but it starts at home.

A perfectly logical argument were it not for the unfortunate incontrovertible reality that it is the top leagues that are structurally rewarded handouts by the existing UEFA setup.

UEFA takes the world it has, dominated by a handful of clubs in less than a handful of leagues, and deliberately and consciously exacerbates that financial gulf.
 
A perfectly logical argument were it not for the unfortunate incontrovertible reality that it is the top leagues that are structurally rewarded handouts by the existing UEFA setup.

UEFA takes the world it has, dominated by a handful of clubs in less than a handful of leagues, and deliberately and consciously exacerbates that financial gulf.

But why do these leagues get such rewards? It's not because it's a gesture towards them it's becaus that's where the money is due to larger fanbases and a bigger desire to watch them globally.

If leagues tapped into their local supporting potential more it would take the global strength away from the Barcelonas, Real Madrid's and Man Uniteds of this world and thus the UEFA money wouldn't be structured to do so. We can't rely on UEFA to become less corrupt, we know the reason they are in charge much like governments is because of their Psychopathic tendencies and lust for power but what we can control is the desire of the local person to get swayed. Support your local club, support their growth, help them grow and these countries and the people in them can leave a lasting legacy from their support, something that will matter far more than a half and half scarf.

The way these clubs compete again isn't by waiting around and relying on a favour, it's by tapping into their own potential and I'd love to see the likes of Copenhagen, Stockholm, Celtic, Rangers start doing so. The moment these countries stop giving their support to non local clubs, the less chance UEFA will keep pumping money into their cash cows.

I want a spread opportunity for growth but clubs need to find a way of tapping into all the potential they have. Spurs share a city with how many other professional football teams? 12 maybe (Tottenham Hotspur, Woolwich, West Ham, Chelsea, Fulham, Crystal Palace, QPR, Brentford, Leyton Orient, AFC Wimbledon, Charlton Athetic, Millwall). Are we honestly saying that cities like Glasgow, Copenhagen, Amsterdam etc and those respective cities countries are really doing what they need to get their football as competitive as the rest?

We had to pierce through the top 4 barrier with no sugar daddy, no main hold on a city, no really big global fan base but we did so we now reap the rewards. Other clubs in other countries should take note and do the same if they want a piece of that action, it's just the nature of the beast mate.
 
Last edited:
It's chicken and egg ...

UEFA rewards the countries with the best clubs, that attract the biggest TV audience, that generates the most sponsorship, that make UEFA it's money.

That's not because of any 'favouritism' it's because that's what the TV fans want to watch ... if a country of 66m people can produce 14m fans whilst a country of 81m people only has 2.6m fans, then which country will attract the better TV figures? and thus which deserves the bigger reward?

The top clubs use the same argument to demand a greater share of the local TV, but their argument is weaker because they need a league to survive, UEFA do not need 74 teams from 54 associations to make up the CL, they do that to enhance the European game, that's their contribution.

No coincidence that the best TV figures, so the biggest money earners, are the top five leagues, UEFA give the largest returns to the top five leagues so UEFA can make the most money ... it's just simple economics. Giving Scotland, Belgium, Turkey, Ukraine a load more cash won't generate new TV fans ... we no longer live in closed communities the world is a very small place. There are more Spurs fans in Australia than in N17 that's just the way it is.

You can't make a country into football fanatics, you have to live with what you have. UEFA are not in the business of changing national public opinion they are simply there to support what already exists. You might want them as a federal overlord but it is never going to happen.
 
Last edited:
What part of "Germany has inherently more local supporting potential than Portugal" don't you understand, exactly?

I'm talking about the chasm between clubs.

main-qimg-9ff99573163d9428a74d8a6750206ddf


Manchester United have 73m followers on Facebook, Bayern Munich have 49m yet greater Manchester only has a population of 2.8m and Bavaria 13m with Munich accounting for 1.4m of that number. What I'm saying is that clubs need to tap into their local markets instead of letting the oligopoly of fanbases occur. If they are waiting for handouts from UEFA they'll be waiting a long time because ultimately UEFA cares about coin and it makes more sense to them to give that coin to the big dogs winning over the punters and getting viewing figures up. It's a natural effect of the beast we all love sadly.

Berlin & Hamburg have bigger populations than Munich.... why aren't they growing their local support and going toe to toe if having more inherently local support is such a crucial factor? The sooner countries and communities find a way of bringing their fanbases back to local clubs, the sooner we will find that competitiveness in Europe and across European leagues we seek and hope for and if that isn't possible, they should try and pinch a few glory hunter numbers for themselves by making their League a spectacle people from overseas want to watch and follow.

Take La Liga for example (its Wiki I know don't shoot me)


Data of this survey confirmed the widespread impression that most of Spain’s people are supporters of Real Madrid (32.4%) or FC Barcelona (24.7%), and the other teams have fewer supporters nationwide, as Atlético de Madrid (16.1%), Valencia CF (3.5%), Athletic Bilbao (3.3%) or Sevilla FC (3.2%).

According to a survey, just under 75% of Spain's population either supports Real Madrid, Barcelona or Atletico Madrid. I'm pretty sure that 3 in every 4 Spaniards don't live in just those two cities and with numbers like that, can we really blame UEFA for pumping money into them to make them more watchable by the masses and for the masses? It's tough but it's the nature of the beast. It gets more competitive the more teams start rivaling them and their ways and that starts at a community level, just how I see it mate.
 
Last edited:
I accept your point but think on this ....

UEFA were to push 70/80/100m to Ajax, Celtic, Brugge, Zagreb, Slavia Prague etc. In each of those countries the domestic league is now screwed with one club having five times the resources of all the other clubs. It happens already with teams just receiving qualifying payments.

If UEFA were to become the "financial supply line" for a top team in the lesser countries that would damage domestic football, the reality is it already has in many places. By pushing the majority of the money to the top leagues at least UEFA are not destroying the heart and soul of the sport, the local interest, the match-going supporters, and the community bonds elsewhere.

Sure the big 16 clubs will have an advantage but it's not like the EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, Serie A and Ligue 1 are all one team walkovers, they do at least have some level of competitiveness.

Whilst I take your point that "fair" distribution to all those taking part is the eutopian dream, in reality giving massive sums of money to just one club in a lesser league risks destroying that league.

There is an argument the UEFA should give the cash to the participating clubs parent league to distribute amongst it's members, but again a good theory that's totally unworkable in practice - Liverpool win the CL and 20 EPL clubs get an equal share of the rewards? In a business environment that's simply never going to happen.

Of course we could nationalise all 92 professional clubs, give then each an equal share of revenue, and pay all the players an equal salary regardless of ability. Socialist football, didn't Woolwich try that?

One option is to give 50% of the prize money to the winning clubs and the other 50% to the various leagues based upon the performance of each league. This incentivizes individual
team performance and overall quality among the leagues.

It doesn’t have to be as extreme as you suggested in your straw man.
 
I'm talking about the chasm between clubs.

main-qimg-9ff99573163d9428a74d8a6750206ddf


Manchester United have 73m followers on Facebook, Bayern Munich have 49m yet greater Manchester only has a population of 2.8m and Bavaria 13m with Munich accounting for 1.4m of that number. What I'm saying is that clubs need to tap into their local markets instead of letting the oligopoly of fanbases occur. If they are waiting for handouts from UEFA they'll be waiting a long time because ultimately UEFA cares about coin and it makes more sense to them to give that coin to the big dogs winning over the punters and getting viewing figures up. It's a natural effect of the beast we all love sadly.

Berlin & Hamburg have bigger populations than Munich.... why aren't they growing their local support and going toe to toe if having more inherently local support is such a crucial factor? The sooner countries and communities find a way of bringing their fanbases back to local clubs, the sooner we will find that competitiveness in Europe and across European leagues we seek and hope for and if that isn't possible, they should try and pinch a few glory hunter numbers for themselves by making their League a spectacle people from overseas want to watch and follow.

Take La Liga for example (its Wiki I know don't shoot me)


Data of this survey confirmed the widespread impression that most of Spain’s people are supporters of Real Madrid (32.4%) or FC Barcelona (24.7%), and the other teams have fewer supporters nationwide, as Atlético de Madrid (16.1%), Valencia CF (3.5%), Athletic Bilbao (3.3%) or Sevilla FC (3.2%).

According to a survey, just under 75% of Spain's population either supports Real Madrid, Barcelona or Atletico Madrid. I'm pretty sure that 3 in every 4 Spaniards don't live in just those two cities and with numbers like that, can we really blame UEFA for pumping money into them to make them more watchable by the masses and for the masses? It's tough but it's the nature of the beast. It gets more competitive the more teams start rivaling them and their ways and that starts at a community level, just how I see it mate.

I disagree slightly those numbers for barca and real madrid are slightly scewed Central and South America Fans also support those two teams plus people want to watch the best players on the planet which clearly Real Madrid and Barca has the spanish banks also invest alot of money in both teams.
 
TV income is the driver but TV income is driven by viewers and supporters ... so to claim that Countries and their teams with the most supporters are not earning their position? That's just the usual politics of envy that pervades society today.

The biggest countries with the most fans have the best clubs? Why should 1.9m paying Scottish fans have the same expectation as 13.9m paying English fans? ... it's not big bad UEFA it's economics. UEFA massively over reward the smaller leagues, if it was done on pure numbers the small clubs would get vastly less than they do now.

attendance-european-football-leagues-map.png


Nothing to stop a team from a smaller league making the grade, but to say they are 'entitled' is to have no understanding of the real world.

On that observation Spurs should be getting 6x more TV revenue than Bournemouth?
 
Back
Top Bottom