Interesting that you can start from publicly available knowledge, and end with some pretty whacky conclusions.
There's a couple of factual errors in there, but nothing major (teams in the SPL play each other 3 times a year or more, if you take in cup competitions).
I think mostly you're in error by considering that the major source of income for football teams is gate money - if that were so, then the team attracting most supporters through the gates would have a major advantage. However, this would not be enough for them to offer huge salaries to the best players.
Total income to a club is broken up into gate money, merchandising, sponsorship and TV money (a special case of sponsorship)if you like. This money tends to go to the biggest clubs, and the more money which goes to a club, the better it's able to recruit good players, and the bigger it becomes.
In Scotland, that has led to two giants and a lot of minnows. In England, probably half a dozen giants and a lot of minnows. However, the minnows in English football receive a lot more from SKY's TV deal than the minnows in Scotland.
Existence for 90% of teams in Scotland is marginal, and one of the two giants have bankrupted themselves by trying to play on the same scale as the English giants.
National leagues need more than two teams, so the free market does not work here. It's no use saying that a Clydebank fan is free to go to see his local team when they've been driven out of business. And no one will pay to watch Celtic play Rangers 32 times a year. Essentially this is an argument for amalgamation - initially of leagues, as the giants come together, and then of teams, as the giants become minnows in turn.
I'd say we're in the early days of this, globally, but locally it's already taking effect.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2012-02-21 02:38 pm (UTC)There's a couple of factual errors in there, but nothing major (teams in the SPL play each other 3 times a year or more, if you take in cup competitions).
I think mostly you're in error by considering that the major source of income for football teams is gate money - if that were so, then the team attracting most supporters through the gates would have a major advantage. However, this would not be enough for them to offer huge salaries to the best players.
Total income to a club is broken up into gate money, merchandising, sponsorship and TV money (a special case of sponsorship)if you like. This money tends to go to the biggest clubs, and the more money which goes to a club, the better it's able to recruit good players, and the bigger it becomes.
In Scotland, that has led to two giants and a lot of minnows. In England, probably half a dozen giants and a lot of minnows. However, the minnows in English football receive a lot more from SKY's TV deal than the minnows in Scotland.
Existence for 90% of teams in Scotland is marginal, and one of the two giants have bankrupted themselves by trying to play on the same scale as the English giants.
National leagues need more than two teams, so the free market does not work here. It's no use saying that a Clydebank fan is free to go to see his local team when they've been driven out of business. And no one will pay to watch Celtic play Rangers 32 times a year. Essentially this is an argument for amalgamation - initially of leagues, as the giants come together, and then of teams, as the giants become minnows in turn.
I'd say we're in the early days of this, globally, but locally it's already taking effect.