lubo_blaha Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 the problem with scottish football is a small mentality we cry about the english getting too much money while we beg for any tv deal we cry about our league not being competitive (while selling anyone for any half decent bid) we cry about our teams being out of europe at the qualifying stage (despite doing nothing to structure our domestic season to making sure these clubs are ready) clubs moan about losing local potential fans to the "old firm" (yuk) - but do nothing to get the kids hooked on their club at an early age... and even worse fleece the parents that want to bring their family to the game. If clubs like Aberdeen and Hibs doe what the SFA done in the nineties (give away 50 -75% of tickets to youth clubs/schools etc), those clubs would be a lot better off now Many clubs wouldn't break even if they didn't accept bids for their better pleasures. Not easy either when the clubs wanting them can pay 2/3/4/5 times their current salary.Many clubs have favourable family deals, have great initiatives for young kids to keep them interested etc. but the fact is that people will get attracted to the team that wins most of the time or has bigger crowds unfortunately.Giving away tickets for free devalues what you're trying to sell to everyone else in the stadium. Why should a family who've paid for a season ticket for their kids do so if they could get those tickets for free? Likewise, why should parents pay for their child to go one week when they know they'll get in free some other time? Putting across the idea that going to your game is not worth paying for is not a great idea imo and in practice it leads to loads of empty seats as the kids who are given the tickets don't turn up, especially if you're suggesting we give up 50-75% of our seats up for that! Aberdeen in particular do a lot of good work in schools anyway.I agree completely with the point on the timing of the season and Europe though. I dare say more pressure will be put on the SPFL if a certain club qualify this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booker-T Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said: Are you sure? I thought it was slanted to give the OF most of it, on the dubious premise that they got screened most frequently. The real answer is not to dish it out as prize money at all. All that does is perpetuate an existing order. It's self fulfilling and not remotely in-keeping with any notion of competitive team sport over time. I see the benefit in not paying as prize money... but if we do have prize money it should properly reward 7th over 11th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booker-T Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 6 minutes ago, lubo_blaha said: Many clubs wouldn't break even if they didn't accept bids for their better pleasures. Not easy either when the clubs wanting them can pay 2/3/4/5 times their current salary. Many clubs have favourable family deals, have great initiatives for young kids to keep them interested etc. but the fact is that people will get attracted to the team that wins most of the time or has bigger crowds unfortunately. Giving away tickets for free devalues what you're trying to sell to everyone else in the stadium. Why should a family who've paid for a season ticket for their kids do so if they could get those tickets for free? Likewise, why should parents pay for their child to go one week when they know they'll get in free some other time? Putting across the idea that going to your game is not worth paying for is not a great idea imo and in practice it leads to loads of empty seats as the kids who are given the tickets don't turn up, especially if you're suggesting we give up 50-75% of our seats up for that! Aberdeen in particular do a lot of good work in schools anyway. I agree completely with the point on the timing of the season and Europe though. I dare say more pressure will be put on the SPFL if a certain club qualify this season. In the 90s my stepdad paid for him, me and my bro to watch most Scotland home games. Although tickets were cheap, the actual paying attendance was laughable and excess of half the crowd were part of boys clubs and youth groups ... the point is that the guys i know that were in those clubs are part of the same people that give us great loyal crowds for home matches now. And that 90s team were more successful than this one. Aberdeen doing work in the area of getting school kids committed to their club is good news... that news just hadn't made it's way to this weegie before, so thanks for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stirling Observer Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 What's the point in prize money? Surely the prize of winning the league or European places, avoiding relegation is enough and more important than end of season placings. And further down the league the motivating factor should be a natural winning mentality which every professional footballer should possess. Wealth should be redistributed evenly throughout the game if we want to improve competitiveness. Clearly the old firm have an advantage but an even spread of the wealth every season may help the rest try and close the gap a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booker-T Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 1 minute ago, Stirling Observer said: What's the point in prize money? Surely the prize of winning the league or European places, avoiding relegation is enough and more important than end of season placings. And further down the league the motivating factor should be a natural winning mentality which every professional footballer should possess. Wealth should be redistributed evenly throughout the game if we want to improve competitiveness. Clearly the old firm have an advantage but an even spread of the wealth every season may help the rest try and close the gap a little. i think the concept of it is to make sure teams 9th to 5th always have something to play for... but it's so narrow at that level that it doesn't make sense i think the footballers themselves will always compete... but do boards have the same mentality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 7 minutes ago, Booker-T said: i think the concept of it is to make sure teams 9th to 5th always have something to play for... but it's so narrow at that level that it doesn't make sense i think the footballers themselves will always compete... but do boards have the same mentality? So boards aren't attempting to field competitive teams? Is that what you're saying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 I think it's a natural thing to reward better performance - i.e. higher finish - with a bigger payment and if that encourages managers in the post-split mid-table so be it. It was £ per point 'back-in-the-day'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 6 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said: I think it's a natural thing to reward better performance - i.e. higher finish - with a bigger payment and if that encourages managers in the post-split mid-table so be it. It was £ per point 'back-in-the-day'. How did it work 'back in the day'? From what you're saying, I'm guessing we're talking about a more egalitarian time anyway, as well as one where wins carried double, rather than triple the amounts for a draw. I'm guessing also that you're talking about a pre-sponsorship time. Did the money come from the pools and did we have similar disparities in amounts awarded in this way, to now? I think it's undeniable that the old SPL arrangement was fixed to favour our big two in an engineered way that would have Strachan applauding. It's certainly improved since, but I think in a team game that operates cyclically, prize money in the League does not aid competition. Of course though, any such concerns are trivial alongside the capacity for vandalism to our game that the CL wields. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 Until into the 1980s SFL prizemoney was paid £X per point. Most of it was from the pools. Still paid this way in Highland League, though they also have a lump-sum for the champion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 58 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said: Until into the 1980s SFL prizemoney was paid £X per point. Most of it was from the pools. Still paid this way in Highland League, though they also have a lump-sum for the champion. Was all the money the League had to dish out, distributed in this way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ya Bezzer! Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 On 14/01/2017 at 19:56, Monkey Tennis said: Are you sure? I thought it was slanted to give the OF most of it, on the dubious premise that they got screened most frequently. The real answer is not to dish it out as prize money at all. All that does is perpetuate an existing order. It's self fulfilling and not remotely in-keeping with any notion of competitive team sport over time. I think I'm right in saying that the Norwegian TV deal is shared equally between all the clubs right through the divisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 43 minutes ago, Ya Bezzer! said: I think I'm right in saying that the Norwegian TV deal is shared equally between all the clubs right through the divisions. I think too that all their clubs get screened, so it probably helps with justifying it, not that something so sensible should need justifying, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.