Five Year EFL Deal: Death of the 3pm?

[Mar]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... per-season

Sky has bought the rights to the EFL meaning that clubs will get a 50% increase in value on the current deal.

It means that Sky will broadcast the following:
328 Championship
248 League One
248 League Two
15 play off matches (as per usual)
93 Carabao Cup games
All EFL Trophy Matches


Of the possible 1610 games that could be shown, now just over half of the games will be shown (51.18%).

Article 48 is set to remain meaning the 3pm Saturday still cant be broadcast upon, but it will mean that vast amount of fixture disruption is likely to happen in order to facilitate this new Sky deal.

On the plus side, a minimum of 8 cameras will be being used per game.

Given that over half of the games are going to be broadcast I can't see how this will be helpful for fans wanting a 3pm kick off on Saturday.

[Worthy4England]

The business model is shifting towards being able to watch games online. They should probably embrace it, rather than fight it.

[DJBlu]

Reading between the lines there is still the option to stream 3pm games to international customers but the club have yet to confirm if they will.

If this is the case I may have to start flying people out to my villa in Spain so we can all sit on the couch by the pool.

[nicholaldo]

The business model is shifting towards being able to watch games online. They should probably embrace it, rather than fight it.

I think it's difficult for lower league clubs to attract new supporters through an online streaming model.

[Worthy4England]

The business model is shifting towards being able to watch games online. They should probably embrace it, rather than fight it.

I think it's difficult for lower league clubs to attract new supporters through an online streaming model.

It's difficult for lower league clubs to attract new supporters, period!

[Mar]

The business model is shifting towards being able to watch games online. They should probably embrace it, rather than fight it.

I think it's difficult for lower league clubs to attract new supporters through an online streaming model.

Of course, but its a damn site easier if they have the ability to stream. Just as Wrexham and their troubles last season.

[TANGODANCER]

As ever, money, investors, betting and corporations rule the game. Football actually has little to do with any of it. Might as well just flip a coin . Results, not performance or entertainment are the priority....How many of the EFL committee actually own a season ticket to any club, or go to any function that isn't complimentary? Benefit of the masses, yeah...right.

[Mar]

As ever, money, investors, betting and corporations rule the game. Football actually has little to do with any of it. Might as well just flip a coin . Results, not performance or entertainment are the priority....How many of the EFL committee actually own a season ticket to any club, or go to any function that isn't complimentary? Benefit of the masses, yeah...right.

I quite like the German model with significant swathes of fan ownership. Those with a non-financial vested interest can actually speak up as to these deals. I'm fairly certain that if there was more fan ownership we'd see less squeezing from SkySports.

I do wonder if Sky have finally decided to keep the infrastructure in the clubs rather than setting up again and again. IIRC Arsenal setup their stadium with proper cabling to avoid the charge imposed by Sky only for Sky to do their own cabling again as there was some legal wranging to be had.

[officer_dibble]

Just seen Andy holt post on Twitter on streaming. One club in league two, which has to be Wrexham, made £1.2 million from streaming internationally - https://x.com/andyhholt/status/17797076 ... 9tBJZu-EQg

That’s obscene!

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I can see both sides on this 'cos neither's perfect. Nowhere enar.

It's not "fair" that Wrexham have Hollywood money and 'pull', but is it fair to deny any club the chance to dream? FFP and its like were designed to stop financial doping, which is obviously a huge problem - but if all clubs can only operate within "realistic means", are we never again going to see a non-league club establish themselves in the 92? Or a team - say a plucky northern mill town with a fading history - allowed to pay the right wages to compete in the top flight?

Essentially the problem is that some clubs make more money than others. They just *do*. Should they be violently shorn of this via the enforced redistribution that, for curious reasons, happens in the country that hates socialist redistribution more than any other, the good ol' US of A? Not sure we'd like that.

Before the abolition of the maximum wage it didn't matter much as players could only officially earn a set amount - hence England international Tommy Lawton moving to third-tier Noitts County (although the offer of a job on retirement helped). Even after that clearly restrictive practice went out in the 60s (singalling trouble for those mill towns...) there was still a reasonable amount of redistribution, but that was chipped away in the 80s by the Heathrow Agreement slashing payments down the pyramid, then the Premier League more or less abolishing them altogether.

And now we're here. Where do we go next? I've heard the 50+1 (German ownership) argument for a decade or more and I can see some merit in it. But it's limiting. Quite aside from how demonstrably uneven the German league is anyway (though props to Leverkusen for finally breaking the Bayernopoly), we'd have to accept that if we get less money into English football, the game gets poorer - financially and literally. If there's a talent drain abroad, it might mean more English kids get games, but they might not be facing the best in the business, and they might not become the best in the business. I'm old enough to remember when the English league wasn't the best in the world, when even the biggest teams would lose players every summer to Italy, Germany, France or Spain, when you only saw the world's best players every four years at the World Cup. It was... very different.

[Worthy4England]

Aye, I don't think his logic lands further than his virtual keyboard. If the key element was the League (rather than Club), then every team would make +/- a fairly narrow % of £1.2m. Clearly this is about a Club and as ever lived, he's got plenty to say about it.

I'm not oblivious to the plight, but don't see it getting resolved any time soon and to inhibit genuine investment wouldn't be great either. Never heard Utd bleat about money until City had lots of it.

[officer_dibble]

Yeah agreed, just thought that figure was eye watering - we must make what a few hundred grand max streaming to expats, that’s one hell of a market Wrexham have tapped into.